T44n1835_辯中邊論述記

大正藏第 44 冊 No. 1835 辯中邊論述記

No. 1835 [cf. No. 1600]

辯中邊論述記捲上

翻經沙門基撰

佛滅度后九百年間。無著菩薩挺生於世。往慈氏所請說大論。因緣如別處說。慈氏為說此論本頌。名辯中邊頌。無著既受得已。便付世親使為廣釋。故此長行世親所造。名辯中邊論。辯者顯了分別異名。中者正善離邊之目。邊者邪惡有失之號。即是明顯正邪論也。若爾何故不名邪正乃號中邊。今言中邊。顯處中道離二邊執契當正理。故標此名。簡偏說有偏說空教。彼雖正善而非是中。故言中邊不云邪正。言中邊者。所明理名。復言辯者。能顯教稱。謂此論教明正邪理具辯中邊。中邊之辯。蘇漫多聲中第六轉攝。六離合釋中依士釋也。舊云世親所造非也。中邊分別論者。言不順此也。云相品者。所詮為名。即三性之相此中明也。然所明中亦非唯相。如歸敬頌及次總標七義頌等。皆非是相。從宗多分以立品名故名相品。如無上乘品。有釋。名分。此等七品先後增減。如下應知。然初二品是境。次三品是行。后二品是果。是七品意。又初歸敬世親所為。自此下頌皆慈氏說。彌勒本有一百一十三頌。初一總攝。后一結釋。中為正宗。世親釋有七百頌

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本大正藏第 44 冊 No. 1835 《辯中邊論述記》

No. 1835 [cf. No. 1600]

《辯中邊論述記》捲上

翻經沙門基撰

佛陀滅度后九百年間，無著菩薩降生於世。前往慈氏菩薩（Maitreya，未來佛）處請求宣說大論，因緣如其他地方所說。慈氏菩薩為他說了此論的根本頌，名為《辯中邊頌》。無著菩薩接受后，便交給世親菩薩（Vasubandhu，印度佛教論師）使其廣為解釋。因此，此長行是世親菩薩所造，名為《辯中邊論》。『辯』是顯明、分別的異名，『中』是正善、遠離邊見的名稱，『邊』是邪惡、有所缺失的稱號。即是明顯正邪的論典。如果這樣，為什麼不叫《邪正論》而叫《中邊論》呢？現在說『中邊』，是顯示處於中道，遠離二邊執著，契合正理。所以標立此名，是爲了簡別偏說有、偏說空的教義。它們雖然正善，但並非是中道。所以說『中邊』，而不說『邪正』。說『中邊』，是所闡明的道理的名稱。再說『辯』，是能顯的教法的稱謂。意思是此論的教法闡明正邪之理，具備辯明中邊的功用。『中邊之辯』，在蘇漫多聲（梵文語法術語）中屬於第六轉攝，在六離合釋中屬於依士釋。舊說此論是世親菩薩所造，是不對的。『中邊分別論』的說法，是不順應此論的。

說『相品』，是以所詮釋的內容作為品名。即是三性（trilaksana，佛教術語，指空，無相，無愿）之相在此品中闡明。然而，所闡明的內容並非只有相，如歸敬頌以及其次的總標七義頌等，都不是相。從宗門的大部分內容來立品名，所以叫『相品』。如『無上乘品』。有的解釋為『分』。這些七品的先後增減，如下文應當知曉。然而，最初二品是境，其次三品是行，最後二品是果。這是七品的意義。另外，最初的歸敬頌是世親菩薩所作，自此以下的頌都是慈氏菩薩所說。彌勒菩薩原本有一百一十三頌，最初一頌總攝，最後一頌總結解釋，中間是正宗。世親菩薩的解釋有七百頌。 English version T44 No. 1835 Treatise on Distinguishing the Middle and the Extremes

No. 1835 [cf. No. 1600]

Treatise on Distinguishing the Middle and the Extremes, Volume 1

Composed by the Sramana Yiji, who translated the scriptures

Nine hundred years after the Buddha's Parinirvana, Bodhisattva Asanga (Wuzhu) was born into the world. He went to Maitreya Bodhisattva (Cishi, the future Buddha) to request the exposition of the great treatise. The circumstances are as described elsewhere. Maitreya Bodhisattva spoke the fundamental verses of this treatise for him, named 'Verses on Distinguishing the Middle and the Extremes'. After Asanga Bodhisattva received them, he entrusted them to Vasubandhu Bodhisattva (Shishi, an Indian Buddhist philosopher) to widely explain them. Therefore, this prose section was composed by Vasubandhu Bodhisattva, named 'Treatise on Distinguishing the Middle and the Extremes'. 'Distinguishing' (bian) is a different name for clarifying and differentiating. 'Middle' (zhong) is a term for what is correct and good, and free from extremes. 'Extremes' (bian) is a designation for what is evil and flawed. It is a treatise that clearly distinguishes between right and wrong. If so, why is it not called 'Treatise on Right and Wrong' but 'Treatise on Distinguishing the Middle and the Extremes'? Now, saying 'Middle and Extremes' shows that it is situated in the Middle Way, free from attachment to the two extremes, and in accordance with correct principles. Therefore, this name is established to distinguish it from teachings that one-sidedly assert existence or one-sidedly assert emptiness. Although they are correct and good, they are not the Middle Way. Therefore, it is called 'Middle and Extremes', and not 'Right and Wrong'. Saying 'Middle and Extremes' is the name of the principle being elucidated. Furthermore, saying 'Distinguishing' is the name of the teaching that can reveal it. It means that the teaching of this treatise clarifies the principles of right and wrong, and has the function of distinguishing the Middle and the Extremes. 'The Distinguishing of the Middle and the Extremes' belongs to the sixth case in the Sūmantasa (Sanskrit grammatical term), and belongs to the dependent determinant compound in the six types of compounds. The old saying that this treatise was composed by Vasubandhu Bodhisattva is incorrect.

Saying 'Chapter on Characteristics' (Xiang Pin) uses the content being explained as the name of the chapter. That is, the characteristics of the three natures (trilaksana, Buddhist term, referring to emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness) are explained in this chapter. However, what is explained is not only characteristics, such as the verses of homage and the subsequent verses summarizing the seven meanings, etc., are not characteristics. The name of the chapter is established from the majority of the content of the doctrine, so it is called 'Chapter on Characteristics'. Such as the 'Chapter on the Supreme Vehicle'. Some explain it as 'section'. The order of these seven chapters, their increase or decrease, should be known as follows. However, the first two chapters are the object, the next three chapters are the practice, and the last two chapters are the result. This is the meaning of the seven chapters. In addition, the initial verses of homage were composed by Vasubandhu Bodhisattva, and the verses from here onwards were all spoken by Maitreya Bodhisattva. Maitreya Bodhisattva originally had one hundred and thirteen verses, the first verse summarizes, the last verse concludes and explains, and the middle is the main doctrine. Vasubandhu Bodhisattva's explanation has seven hundred verses.

【English Translation】 English translation line 1 English translation line 2

。皆以不長不短八字為句。三十二字為頌。然世親未回□。頌十四字為一句。五十六字為一頌。即舊真諦已譯于梁朝。文錯義違。更譯茲日。諸不同處至下當知。

論曰。稽首造此論乃至當勤顯斯義。

述曰。此論一部總有三分。慈氏本頌起于正宗及有結釋。此中初分世親所說。此即第一歸敬別序分。然諸經論通敬三寶皆名通序。此論即無。大論六十四及對法第一云。本釋二師此論所依及能起故。略無通序歸敬三寶。于別序中。文意有二。上之三句歸敬別師。第四句者顯歸敬意。明當造論。上三句中。初之二字顯歸敬相。次十三字明所歸敬。言稽首者。起殷凈心發勝三業。申誠歸依敬禮之異名焉。稽者至也。首者頭也。以手至首故名稽首。此即儒教之所釋焉。今亦發言兼策意業。投誠請念名稽首也。此稽首言通二所敬。所歸敬中。上之八字正顯頌主彌勒大尊。下之五字明教論者無著菩薩。言善逝者。謂即如來十號之第五名也。梵云蘇揭多。舊言修伽陀訛也。蘇翻為善。揭多雲已逝。今略云善逝。善者謂好。逝者謂去。若有雜染惡來生死。純懷清凈好去涅槃。即是如來受用變化。或即法身已好去。故立善逝名。但言好去非已好去。即應言蘇焰䓳(平聲呼云焰䓳)。此翻但名為逝。或是往義。即是因中好去之

【現代漢語翻譯】論曰：都以不長不短八個字作為一句，三十二個字作為一頌。然而世親菩薩並未返回□（具體地點未知）。頌文變為十四個字一句，五十六個字一頌，即舊時真諦法師已在梁朝翻譯的版本。但文句錯亂，義理違背，所以現在重新翻譯。各種不同之處，在下文將會說明。

論曰：稽首（頂禮）造此論者，乃至應當勤奮地闡明此論的意義。

述曰：此論一部總共有三分。慈氏菩薩的本頌開始於正宗部分，以及最後的總結和解釋。這裡最初的部分是世親菩薩所說，這即是第一部分的歸敬別序分。然而，諸經論中普遍對三寶的敬意都稱為通序，此論中沒有。在《大論》第六十四卷和《對法》第一卷中說，本頌的作者和解釋者是此論所依據和能夠發起的原因，所以省略了通序，直接歸敬三寶。在別序中，文意有二：前面的三句是歸敬特別的老師，第四句是表明歸敬的意義，說明將要造論。前面的三句中，最初的兩個字顯示了歸敬的相狀，接下來的十三個字說明了所歸敬的對象。『稽首』的意思是，發起殷切清凈的心，發動殊勝的身、口、意三業，表達真誠的歸依和敬禮的異名。『稽』是至的意思，『首』是頭的意思，用手至頭，所以叫做稽首，這是儒教的解釋。現在也用言語兼顧意業，投誠請念，名為稽首。這個『稽首』一詞，通用於兩個所敬的對象。在所歸敬的對象中，上面的八個字，正是顯示頌文的主人彌勒大尊（Maitreya，未來佛），下面的五個字，說明教論者無著菩薩（Asanga，瑜伽行派創始人之一）。『善逝』，指的是如來十號（Tathagata's Ten Titles）中的第五個名號。梵文是蘇揭多（Sugata），舊譯為修伽陀是錯誤的。蘇翻譯為善，揭多意思是已逝。現在簡略地說為善逝。善，是好的意思；逝，是去的意思。如果有雜染惡業的生死，完全懷著清凈美好的涅槃，這就是如來的受用變化身，或者就是法身已經美好地離去，所以立名為善逝。如果只說好去，而不是已經好去，就應該說蘇焰䓳（音譯），只翻譯為逝，或者說是往義，就是因中好去的

【English Translation】 The treatise states: All sentences are composed of eight characters, neither too long nor too short, with thirty-two characters forming a verse. However, Acarya Vasubandhu did not return to □ (specific location unknown). The verse then became fourteen characters per line, and fifty-six characters per verse, which is the old translation by Paramartha in the Liang Dynasty. However, the text was flawed and the meaning was distorted, so it is now being re-translated. The various differences will be explained below.

The treatise states: I bow my head (obeisance) to the author of this treatise, and I shall diligently elucidate the meaning of this treatise.

The commentary states: This treatise is divided into three parts. The original verses of Maitreya (Maitreya, the future Buddha) begin with the main section, as well as the final summary and explanation. The initial part here is what was spoken by Acarya Vasubandhu (Vasubandhu, a major figure in Buddhism), which is the preliminary section of taking refuge and paying homage. However, the universal reverence for the Three Jewels (the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Sangha) in various sutras and treatises is generally called the 'common preface,' which is absent in this treatise. In the sixty-fourth volume of the Mahayana-abhidharma-samuccaya and the first volume of the Abhidharmasamuccaya, it is said that the author of the verses and the commentator are the basis and the cause for the arising of this treatise, so the common preface is omitted, and direct reverence is paid to the Three Jewels. In the specific preface, there are two meanings in the text: the first three lines are to pay homage to the special teacher, and the fourth line is to indicate the meaning of taking refuge, explaining that the treatise will be composed. In the first three lines, the first two characters show the aspect of taking refuge, and the following thirteen characters explain the object of refuge. 'Kesi' (bowing the head) means to arouse a sincere and pure mind, to activate the excellent three karmas of body, speech, and mind, and to express the different names of sincere refuge and reverence. 'Ki' means 'to reach,' and 'si' means 'head.' Using the hand to reach the head is called 'kesi,' which is the explanation of Confucianism. Now, language is also used to take into account mental karma, sincerely requesting mindfulness, which is called 'kesi.' This term 'kesi' is used for both objects of reverence. Among the objects of refuge, the above eight characters precisely show the master of the verses, the great venerable Maitreya (Maitreya, the future Buddha), and the following five characters explain the teacher and commentator, Bodhisattva Asanga (Asanga, one of the founders of the Yogacara school). 'Sugata' refers to the fifth title of the Tathagata's Ten Titles (Tathagata's Ten Titles). The Sanskrit is Sugata, and the old translation of Shujiato is incorrect. Su is translated as 'good,' and gata means 'gone.' Now it is simply said to be 'Sugata.' 'Good' means good; 'gone' means to leave. If there is defiled and evil samsara, completely embracing the pure and beautiful nirvana, this is the transformation body of the Tathagata's enjoyment, or it is the Dharmakaya that has already departed beautifully, so it is named Sugata. If only 'good departure' is said, and not 'already good departure,' then it should be said Su Yan Qi (transliteration), which is only translated as 'gone,' or it is the meaning of going, which is the good departure in the cause of

目。非果圓滿已好去名。論言體者。謂是性義。或即身義。對法論說。身義體義無差別也。依士釋。善逝之體名善逝體。體即法身。善逝即是受用變化。若持業釋。或體即善逝名善逝體。此善逝體即餘二身。謂慈氏尊將紹佛位真善逝子名彼所生。攝大乘說菩薩家勝。謂生佛家之所生育。非如聲聞無智婢子。欲顯慈氏位極尊高如來真子。名彼所生。或真善逝體即法身。慈尊覺者以法為父。要緣如境智方生。故此號慈尊名善逝子。舊言善行子非也。行去名行。即善逝非是行跡。慈尊說頌。即是經師造此論者。故須歸敬。由斯論說稽首造此論善逝體所生。即正歸敬彌勒尊者。及教我等師者。即世親我兄無著菩薩也。無著于彼慈氏尊所既先得已便教世親。世親造釋由兄教力。世親自指己及門人故名我等。謂兄為師。能教己等故。今亦稽首教我等師。即上三句別歸經教二種師也。當勤顯斯義者。顯歸敬意己當造論。勤者精進勇猛異名。顯無懈怠能降邪敵。勇猛顯斯本頌義也。

論曰。此中最初安立論體。

述曰。自下第二顯釋論體分。于中有二。初總標論體彰教所明。后別顯所標次第申義。此即初也。然則天親尊者玄路先於眾聖。意匠穎于群賢。釋此頌文非唯一例。或頌前標后。無結上以生文。或義后結前。有設徴

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：『目』字。表示果位圓滿，已經脫離了原來的名稱。關於『體』的討論，指的是『性』的意義，或者就是『身』的意義。《對法論》中說，『身』的意義和『體』的意義沒有差別。按照依士釋的解釋，善逝（Tathagata，如來）的體性稱為善逝體性。『體』就是法身（Dharmakaya），善逝則是受用身（Sambhogakaya）和變化身（Nirmanakaya）。如果按照持業釋的解釋，或者說『體』就是善逝，稱為善逝體性。這個善逝體性就是其餘的二身。慈氏尊（Maitreya，彌勒菩薩）將要繼承佛位，是真正的善逝之子，被稱為『彼所生』。《攝大乘論》中說，菩薩的家族殊勝，是因為他們出生在佛的家族中，受到佛的養育。不像聲聞（Śrāvaka，小乘弟子）那樣，如同沒有智慧的婢女之子。這是爲了顯示慈氏尊的地位極其尊貴，如同如來的真子，所以稱為『彼所生』。或者說，真正的善逝體性就是法身，慈尊覺者以法為父。因為只有依靠如實的境界，智慧才能產生，所以稱慈尊為善逝之子。舊譯為『善行子』是不對的。『行』是過去的名字，表示善逝已經超越了行跡。慈尊所說的偈頌，就是經師（Sūtra Master）造這部論的原因，所以必須歸敬。因此，論中說『稽首造此論善逝體所生』，就是正式歸敬彌勒尊者，以及教導我們的老師，也就是世親（Vasubandhu）的兄長無著菩薩（Asanga）。無著菩薩從慈氏尊那裡首先得到教導，然後教導世親。世親造這部論，是依靠兄長的教導。世親親自指自己和門人，所以說『我等』，稱兄長為老師，能夠教導自己等人。所以現在也稽首教導我們的老師。以上三句分別歸敬經、教兩種老師。『當勤顯斯義』，表示爲了顯明歸敬的意義，自己應當造論。『勤』是精進、勇猛的別名，表示沒有懈怠，能夠降伏邪敵。勇猛地闡明這部頌的意義。

論曰：此中最初安立論體。

述曰：從下面開始，第二部分是顯釋論體。其中有兩部分：第一部分是總標論體，彰顯教義所闡明的內容；第二部分是分別闡明所標的內容，次第申述意義。這裡是第一部分。然而，世親尊者的玄妙思路超越了眾聖，他的意匠比群賢更加穎悟。解釋這首頌文並非只有一種方式。或者頌文前標后釋，沒有總結上文以引出下文；或者意義在後總結前文，設有提問。

【English Translation】 English version: The word 『Mu』. Indicates that the fruit position is complete and the original name has been abandoned. The discussion of 『essence』 refers to the meaning of 『nature』, or the meaning of 『body』. The Abhidharmasamuccaya says that there is no difference between the meaning of 『body』 and the meaning of 『essence』. According to the yathāsaṃkhya explanation, the essence of the Tathagata (善逝) is called the Tathagata essence. 『Essence』 is the Dharmakaya (法身), while the Tathagata is the Sambhogakaya (受用身) and Nirmanakaya (變化身). According to the karmadhāraya explanation, or 『essence』 is the Tathagata, called the Tathagata essence. This Tathagata essence is the remaining two bodies. Maitreya (慈氏尊), who will inherit the Buddha's position, is the true son of the Tathagata and is called 『born of him』. The Mahāyānasaṃgraha says that the family of Bodhisattvas is superior because they are born into the family of the Buddha and nurtured by the Buddha, unlike the Śrāvakas (聲聞), who are like the children of unwise maids. This is to show that Maitreya's position is extremely noble, like the true son of the Tathagata, so he is called 『born of him』. Alternatively, the true Tathagata essence is the Dharmakaya, and the Awakened One, Maitreya, takes the Dharma as his father. Because wisdom can only arise by relying on the true realm, Maitreya is called the son of the Tathagata. The old translation of 『son of good conduct』 is incorrect. 『Conduct』 is a past name, indicating that the Tathagata has transcended the traces of conduct. The verses spoken by Maitreya are the reason why the Sūtra Master (經師) created this treatise, so reverence must be paid. Therefore, the treatise says 『I bow to the one born of the Tathagata essence who created this treatise』, which is the formal reverence to Maitreya, as well as the teacher who taught us, namely Vasubandhu's (世親) elder brother, Asanga (無著). Asanga first received teachings from Maitreya and then taught Vasubandhu. Vasubandhu created this treatise relying on his brother's teachings. Vasubandhu personally refers to himself and his disciples, so he says 『we』, calling his brother the teacher who can teach himself and others. So now we also bow to the teacher who taught us. The above three sentences respectively pay reverence to the teachers of the sūtras and teachings. 『One should diligently reveal this meaning』 indicates that in order to reveal the meaning of reverence, one should create the treatise. 『Diligence』 is another name for vigor and courage, indicating that there is no懈怠 and one can subdue evil enemies. Vigorously elucidating the meaning of this verse.

The treatise says: Here, the essence of the treatise is initially established.

The commentary says: From below, the second part is to reveal and explain the essence of the treatise. There are two parts: the first part is to generally mark the essence of the treatise, highlighting what the teachings elucidate; the second part is to separately elucidate what is marked, explaining the meaning in order. This is the first part. However, Vasubandhu's profound thoughts surpass the many sages, and his ingenuity is more insightful than the many worthies. There is not only one way to explain this verse. Either the verse marks first and then explains, without summarizing the above to introduce the below; or the meaning summarizes the previous, with questions raised.

而起頌。或始牒文而後申義。或始申義而後牒文。或總標顯頌之大綱。或別釋文之幽隱。略為六例欲貫下文。其間相屬臨文別斷。此則頌前標起無結上以生文。安立者。施設言說之異名。此論體者。非為教體。即是所明法之體也。此體即宗。宗所明故。言此中者。是發論端。或簡持義。謂論別教所詮義。今先總舉出其體性故言此中。

論頌曰。乃至得果無上乘。

述曰。此正宗中合有一百一十三頌。合分為二。初之一頌顯論所明。名總標分。所餘諸頌依標別顯。名別釋分。此即初也。梵云摩咀羅多。此翻為唯。顯決定義。謂論所明定唯此七。梵云遮。此云謂及。或云等。及即相違義。謂相及障等皆有及言。相與障異相非即障。若言等者。謂此七外更有餘法。今顯相違釋故頌致及言。舊本云無上乘唯爾。即決定義也。

論曰。此論唯說乃至七無上乘。

述曰。此別標數屬頌七義。即前六例中釋頌大綱。分位無體。即是對治故。于分位有即此言也。然舊本無論曰之言。所以皆言此論世親所說。今則不然故致論曰。

論曰。今於此中先辯其相。

述曰。別解七義也。此解初中名別釋分。合有七品一百一十一頌。初二十二頌明相品。次有十七頌明障。次有二十三頌明真實。次有十四頌明

{ "translations": [ "現代漢語譯本：\n然後開始用頌文。有時先列出條文，然後闡述意義；有時先闡述意義，然後列出條文；有時總括地標明頌文的大綱；有時分別解釋條文的深奧之處。大致分為六種情況，以貫穿下文。其中相互關聯的部分，根據具體條文來判斷。這指的是在頌文前標明，而不是總結上文以引出下文。『安立』是施設言說的不同名稱。這部論的『體』，不是指教義的本體，而是指所要闡明的法的本體。這個『體』就是宗，因為宗所要闡明的就是它。說『此中』，是指發起論端，或者簡要地把握要義，即這部論特別闡述的意義。現在先總括地提出它的體性，所以說『此中』。\n\n論頌說：『乃至獲得果位的無上乘。』\n\n註釋說：這正宗中總共有一百一十三頌，分為兩部分。最初的一頌顯示論所要闡明的內容，稱為總標分。其餘的頌文根據總標分別進行闡述，稱為別釋分。這就是最初的一頌。梵語是摩咀羅多(Matra)，翻譯成漢語是『唯』，表示決定的意義。意思是說，這部論所要闡明的，確定只有這七種。梵語是遮(Cha)，翻譯成漢語是『謂及』，或者說『等』。『及』表示相反的意義，意思是說，相與障礙等都有『及』這個詞。相與障礙是不同的，相不是障礙。如果說『等』，意思是說，在這七種之外還有其他的法。現在爲了闡明相反的意義，所以頌文采用了『及』這個詞。舊的版本說『無上乘唯爾』，也是決定的意思。\n\n論說：『這部論只說乃至七種無上乘。』\n\n註釋說：這是分別標明數量，屬於頌文的七種意義，也就是前面六種情況中解釋頌文大綱的情況。分位沒有實體，是因為它是對治。在分位中有，就是指這個意思。然而舊的版本沒有『論說』這兩個字，所以都說是世親(Vasubandhu)所說。現在不是這樣，所以加上『論說』。\n\n論說：『現在在這其中，先辨別它的相。』\n\n註釋說：這是分別解釋七種意義。這解釋最初的意義，稱為別釋分。總共有七品，一百一十一頌。最初的二十二頌闡明相品，其次有十七頌闡明障礙，其次有二十三頌闡明真實，其次有十四頌闡明……" , "english_translations": [ "English version:\nThen begins the verse. Sometimes it starts by listing the clauses and then elaborating on the meaning; sometimes it starts by elaborating on the meaning and then listing the clauses; sometimes it generally indicates the outline of the verse; sometimes it separately explains the obscure parts of the clauses. Roughly divided into six cases to run through the following text. The related parts are judged separately according to the specific clauses. This refers to indicating before the verse, not summarizing the previous text to introduce the following text. 'Establishment' (安立) is a different name for the establishment of speech. The 'essence' (體) of this treatise is not the essence of the doctrine, but the essence of the Dharma (法) to be elucidated. This 'essence' is the tenet (宗), because what the tenet elucidates is it. Saying 'in this' (此中) refers to initiating the argument, or briefly grasping the essentials, that is, the meaning that this treatise specifically elucidates. Now, first, generally put forward its essence, so it is said 'in this'.\n\nThe verse says: 'Until attaining the fruit of the unsurpassed vehicle (無上乘).'\n\nThe commentary says: This main section contains a total of one hundred and thirteen verses, divided into two parts. The first verse shows what the treatise intends to elucidate, called the general indication section (總標分). The remaining verses separately elucidate according to the general indication, called the separate explanation section (別釋分). This is the first verse. The Sanskrit is Matra (摩咀羅多), which translates to 'only' (唯) in Chinese, indicating a definite meaning. It means that what this treatise intends to elucidate is definitely only these seven. The Sanskrit is Cha (遮), which translates to 'namely and' (謂及) or 'etc.' (等) in Chinese. 'And' indicates the opposite meaning, meaning that aspects and obstacles, etc., all have the word 'and'. Aspects and obstacles are different; aspects are not obstacles. If it says 'etc.', it means that there are other Dharmas besides these seven. Now, in order to elucidate the opposite meaning, the verse uses the word 'and'. The old version says 'the unsurpassed vehicle is only this' (無上乘唯爾), which also means definite.\n\nThe treatise says: 'This treatise only speaks of up to seven unsurpassed vehicles.'\n\nThe commentary says: This separately indicates the number, belonging to the seven meanings of the verse, which is the case of explaining the outline of the verse in the previous six cases. Divisions have no substance, because they are antidotes. Having in divisions refers to this meaning. However, the old version does not have the words 'the treatise says' (論曰), so it is said that this treatise was said by Vasubandhu (世親). Now it is not so, so 'the treatise says' is added.\n\nThe treatise says: 'Now, in this, first distinguish its aspects.'\n\nThe commentary says: This separately explains the seven meanings. This explains the initial meaning, called the separate explanation section. There are a total of seven chapters, one hundred and eleven verses. The first twenty-two verses elucidate the aspect chapter (相品), the next seventeen verses elucidate the obstacles (障), the next twenty-three verses elucidate the truth (真實), and the next fourteen verses elucidate..." ] }

修對治。次有四頌明分位。次有二頌明得果分。次有二十九頌明無上乘。大文有二。初總生下以發論端。次舉頌曰別申義旨。此即初也。即六例中第一例也。名字不同不能具錄。勘即知之。

論頌曰。虛妄分別乃至於彼亦有此。

述曰。別申義旨也。此一品中二十二頌。初十一頌辯妄分別。后十一頌辯圓成實。然則遍計所執都無實體無別頌明。唯有其名復別立性。然依妄分別等故有此性。今於此中亦因解非有。初十一頌中有二。初別解九相。下總結之。于別解相十一頌中。初之二頌辯依妄分別明三性有無相。次二頌辯妄分別自相。次一頌辯攝相。次二頌辯入無相方便之相。次半頌辯差別相。次半頌辯異門相。次有一頌辯生起相。次有二頌辯雜染相。此頌及下一頌辯有無相也。此頌正解有無之相。后頌結烈有無。辯契中道之相。

論曰。虛妄分別有者至能取分別。

述曰。此中一段皆始牒文而後申義。能取所取遍計所執緣此分別乃是依他。以是能緣非所執故。非全無自性。故名為有。即所取能取之分別。依士釋名。非二取即分別持業立號。然此但約染分說妄分別有即依他。非依他中唯妄分別。有凈分別為依他故。

論曰。於此二都無乃至能取二性。

述曰。釋於此妄分別之上遍計

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本修習對治（通過修行來糾正錯誤）。接下來有四頌說明修行階段。再有二頌說明證得果位。最後有二十九頌說明無上乘（Mahayana，大乘佛教）。大體上有兩個部分。首先總括地引出下文以開始論述。其次舉出頌文來分別闡述意義。這裡是第一部分，也就是六例中的第一例。只是名稱不同，不能全部記錄，查閱即可得知。

論頌說：『虛妄分別（Vikalpa，虛假的分別）乃至彼處，亦有此。』

述曰：這是分別闡述意義。這一品中有二十二頌。最初十一頌辨析虛妄分別，後面十一頌辨析圓成實（Parinispanna，圓滿成就的真實）。然而遍計所執（Parikalpita，虛構的、遍計的自性）完全沒有實體，沒有單獨的頌文說明。只有它的名稱，又另外建立自性。然而依靠虛妄分別等，所以有這種自性。現在在這裡也因為理解非有而進行辨析。最初十一頌中有兩個部分。首先分別解釋九種相，下面總結它們。在分別解釋九種相的十一頌中，最初的兩頌辨析依靠虛妄分別來說明三性（trisvabhāva，三種自性）的有無相。其次兩頌辨析虛妄分別的自相。其次一頌辨析攝相。其次兩頌辨析進入無相（animitta，無相）方便之相。其次半頌辨析差別相。其次半頌辨析異門相。其次有一頌辨析生起相。其次有兩頌辨析雜染相。這頌和下一頌辨析有無相。這頌正是解釋有無之相，后頌總結有無，辨析契合中道（Madhyamaka，中觀）之相。

論曰：『虛妄分別有，乃至能取分別。』

述曰：這裡的一段都是先引用原文，然後闡述意義。能取（grāhaka，能取者）所取（grāhya，所取者）遍計所執，緣於此分別，乃是依他起（paratantra，依他起性）。因為是能緣，不是所執著的，並非完全沒有自性，所以名為『有』。即所取能取的分別，是依士釋名（一種梵文語法結構）。不是二取即分別，這是持業釋名（另一種梵文語法結構）。然而這只是就染污的部分來說虛妄分別是有，即依他起。並非依他起中只有虛妄分別，有清凈的分別也是依他起。

論曰：『於此二都無，乃至能取二性。』

述曰：解釋在此虛妄分別之上，遍計所執

【English Translation】 English version Practice antidotes (correcting errors through practice). Next, there are four verses explaining the stages of practice. Then, there are two verses explaining the attainment of fruition. Finally, there are twenty-nine verses explaining the unsurpassed vehicle (Mahayana, the Great Vehicle of Buddhism). There are two main parts. First, it introduces the following text in general to begin the discussion. Second, it cites the verses to separately elaborate on the meaning. This is the first part, which is the first of the six examples. Only the names are different, so they cannot all be recorded; consult them to find out.

The treatise verse says: 'False discrimination (Vikalpa, false discrimination) even to that place, there is also this.'

Commentary: This is to separately elaborate on the meaning. There are twenty-two verses in this chapter. The first eleven verses analyze false discrimination, and the last eleven verses analyze perfect reality (Parinispanna, perfectly accomplished reality). However, the completely conceptualized nature (Parikalpita, the imagined, completely conceptualized nature) has no substance at all, and there is no separate verse to explain it. Only its name exists, and a nature is established separately. However, relying on false discrimination, etc., this nature exists. Now, here, it is also analyzed because of understanding non-existence. There are two parts in the first eleven verses. First, separately explain the nine aspects, and then summarize them below. In the eleven verses that separately explain the nine aspects, the first two verses analyze relying on false discrimination to explain the existence and non-existence of the three natures (trisvabhāva, three natures). The next two verses analyze the self-nature of false discrimination. The next verse analyzes the aspect of inclusion. The next two verses analyze the aspect of the means of entering non-appearance (animitta, signlessness). The next half-verse analyzes the aspect of difference. The next half-verse analyzes the aspect of different approaches. Next, there is one verse analyzing the aspect of arising. Next, there are two verses analyzing the aspect of defilement. This verse and the next verse analyze the aspect of existence and non-existence. This verse is precisely to explain the aspect of existence and non-existence, and the latter verse summarizes existence and non-existence, analyzing the aspect of conforming to the Middle Way (Madhyamaka, the Middle Way school).

The treatise says: 'False discrimination exists, even to the discriminating of the grasper.'

Commentary: This section all quotes the original text first, and then elaborates on the meaning. The grasper (grāhaka, the one who grasps), the grasped (grāhya, the one who is grasped), and the completely conceptualized, are conditioned by this discrimination, which is dependently arisen (paratantra, dependent origination). Because it is the grasper, not what is grasped, it is not completely without self-nature, so it is called 'existence'. That is, the discrimination of the grasper and the grasped is named according to the agent (a type of Sanskrit grammatical structure). It is not that the two graspers are discrimination, which is named according to the action (another type of Sanskrit grammatical structure). However, this only refers to the defiled part to say that false discrimination exists, which is dependently arisen. It is not that there is only false discrimination in the dependently arisen; pure discrimination is also dependently arisen.

The treatise says: 'In these two, there is no, even the two natures of the grasper.'

Commentary: Explaining that on this false discrimination, the completely conceptualized

所執二取永無。即頌第二句也。然唯解深密經亦圓成實性起執。但以自心相不離依他。或緣如名方起于執故。唯說于妄分別上起二取。略不言于如。以性相違故。

論曰。此中唯有空至及能取空性。

述曰。此解第三句頌。此顯真如是妄分別之性。此者此妄分別。中者第五轉也。謂于妄分別上離二取之空性具有也。即妄分別中離於二取唯有真如。真如是妄分別體故無二取也。但言空者。即二取無。言空性者。以空為門。顯空性即真如也。梵云瞬若。但名為空。言瞬若多故。說真如名空性也。以多此翻是性義故。

論曰。于彼亦有此至虛妄分別。

述曰。此顯妄分別不離真如。謂于彼真如中亦但有此虛妄分別都無二取也。解頌第四句。問如論中說。有實知有。無實知無。何名有無也。

論曰。若於此非有至如實知為有。

述曰。此即總釋頌之大綱答文外難。謂若於此虛妄分別。彼二取非有。由彼二取性非有故。觀之為空。即餘論中無知無也。其妄分別亦有彼真如。真如之上有依他起。此之二性是二取余體非無故如實知有。即餘論中有知有也。即三性中。初性是無。后二性有別。

論曰。若如是者至顯示空相。

述曰。結如是知。無倒顯示。謂知二取計所執妄分別圓成

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：所執著的兩種執取永遠不會存在。這就是偈頌的第二句的意思。然而，《解深密經》（Samdhinirmocana Sutra）也認為圓成實性（Parinispanna）會產生執著，但因為自心相不離依他起性（Paratantra），或者因為緣于名相才產生執著，所以只說在虛妄分別上產生兩種執取，略而不談如如（Tathata），因為如如的體性與執取相違背。論曰：此中唯有空至及能取空性。述曰：這解釋了偈頌的第三句。這顯示了真如（Tathata）是虛妄分別的體性。『此』指的是這個虛妄分別。『中』是第五格，表示在虛妄分別上，具有遠離兩種執取的空性。也就是說，在虛妄分別中，只有遠離兩種執取的真如。真如是虛妄分別的本體，所以沒有兩種執取。只說『空』，就是指兩種執取不存在。說『空性』，是以空作為門徑，顯示空性就是真如。梵語是『瞬若』（Sunyata），只是名為『空』。因為說了『瞬若多』，所以說真如名為『空性』。因為『多』翻譯過來是『性』的意思。論曰：于彼亦有此至虛妄分別。述曰：這顯示了虛妄分別不離真如。意思是說，在那真如中，也只有這虛妄分別，完全沒有兩種執取。解釋偈頌的第四句。問：如果像論中說的那樣，『有實知有，無實知無』，那麼什麼叫做『有』，什麼叫做『無』呢？論曰：若於此非有至如實知為有。述曰：這總括地解釋了偈頌的大綱，回答了經文以外的提問。意思是說，如果在這虛妄分別中，那兩種執取是不存在的，因為那兩種執取的體性是不存在的，觀察它就是空。這就是其他論典中所說的『無知無』。而虛妄分別也有那真如，真如之上存在依他起性。這兩種體性是兩種執取之外的本體，不是沒有，所以如實地知道它存在。這就是其他論典中所說的『有知有』。也就是說，在三種自性中，初性（遍計所執性，Parikalpita）是無，后兩種自性（依他起性，Paratantra；圓成實性，Parinispanna）是有區別的。論曰：若如是者至顯示空相。述曰：總結這樣認知，沒有顛倒地顯示。意思是說，知道兩種執取（遍計所執性，Parikalpita）、虛妄分別（依他起性，Paratantra）和圓成實性（Parinispanna）。

【English Translation】 English version: The two kinds of attachments that are adhered to will never exist. This is the meaning of the second line of the verse. However, the Samdhinirmocana Sutra (Explanation of the Profound Secrets Sutra) also considers that the Parinispanna (Perfected Nature) can give rise to attachment, but because the self-mind aspect is inseparable from the Paratantra (Other-powered Nature), or because attachment arises from reliance on names and forms, it only says that two kinds of attachments arise on the Parikalpita (Imagined Nature), omitting to mention Tathata (Suchness), because the nature of Tathata is contrary to attachment. Treatise says: 'In this, there is only emptiness up to and including the ability to grasp emptiness-nature.' Commentary says: This explains the third line of the verse. This shows that Tathata (Suchness) is the nature of Parikalpita (Imagined Nature). 'This' refers to this Parikalpita. 'In' is the fifth case, indicating that on the Parikalpita, there is the emptiness-nature that is free from the two attachments. That is to say, in the Parikalpita, there is only Tathata that is free from the two attachments. Tathata is the essence of Parikalpita, so there are no two attachments. Saying only 'emptiness' means that the two attachments do not exist. Saying 'emptiness-nature' is to use emptiness as a gateway to show that emptiness-nature is Tathata. The Sanskrit word is Sunyata, which is simply called 'emptiness'. Because Sunyata is mentioned, Tathata is called 'emptiness-nature'. Because 'ta' translates to mean 'nature'. Treatise says: 'In that, there is also this up to and including Parikalpita (Imagined Nature).' Commentary says: This shows that Parikalpita (Imagined Nature) is inseparable from Tathata (Suchness). It means that in that Tathata, there is only this Parikalpita, and there are no two attachments at all. This explains the fourth line of the verse. Question: If, as the treatise says, 'knowing existence as existence, knowing non-existence as non-existence', then what is called 'existence' and what is called 'non-existence'? Treatise says: 'If in this there is non-existence up to and including knowing existence as it truly is.' Commentary says: This summarizes the outline of the verse and answers questions outside the text. It means that if in this Parikalpita (Imagined Nature), the two attachments do not exist, because the nature of the two attachments does not exist, observing it is emptiness. This is what other treatises call 'not knowing non-existence'. And Parikalpita also has that Tathata (Suchness), and on top of Tathata there is Paratantra (Other-powered Nature). These two natures are the essence apart from the two attachments, and they are not non-existent, so knowing existence as it truly is. This is what other treatises call 'knowing existence'. That is to say, in the three natures, the first nature (Parikalpita) is non-existent, and the latter two natures (Paratantra and Parinispanna) are different. Treatise says: 'If it is like this, up to and including showing the aspect of emptiness.' Commentary says: Concluding this knowledge, showing it without inversion. It means knowing the two attachments (Parikalpita), Paratantra (Other-powered Nature), and Parinispanna (Perfected Nature).

二性是有。以實知故即能無倒顯示空相。依他起上二取空無。真空性有。故成無倒顯示于空。言顯示者。說陳空理之異名也。故余所說三性皆無。深為自害。至下當悉。

論曰。複次頌曰至是則契中道。

述曰。重成前義有此頌興。言故說者。故般若等經作此說也。如第二第三句中所說。

論曰。一切法者至名無為。

述曰。未釋故說字。且釋一切法。其二取體是無法故非有無為。依他圓成二體有故名一切法。雖無不失自體。非軌不可稱法。此中言法。可執持故。二取空性即是真如空之性故。

論曰。依前理故至非空非不空。

述曰。即釋頌中故說二字。及欲顯頌第二句也。謂依前頌所說之理故。般若等經說此二性。一切之法名非空非不空。何名非空。

論曰。由有空性至故說非空。

述曰。即是二性體非無故名曰非空。何名非不空。

論曰。由無所取至說非不空。

述曰。遍計所執二取非有說非不空。非不空者。體是無義。此解有無。即第二句頌也。

論曰。有故者至妄分別故。

述曰。謂第三句下一故字通上三種。謂有故無故及有故。此釋有故。二性何故非空。以是有故。以此顯前非空法體。即前頌中虛妄分別及空性有。

論

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：問：二性（兩種自性）是有嗎？答：因為如實知曉，所以能夠無顛倒地顯示空相（空的表相）。依他起性上，能取和所取是空無的。真空性（真實的空性）是有的。因此能夠無顛倒地顯示空性。所說的『顯示』，是陳述空理的另一種說法。所以，其餘所說的三種自性都是沒有的，這深深地損害了自己（的觀點），到後面會詳細說明。

論曰：再次，頌曰……乃至……這就是契合中道。

述曰：爲了再次闡明前面的意義，所以有了這個頌。所說的『故說』，是說般若等經典這樣說的。就像第二句和第三句中所說的。

論曰：一切法……乃至……名為無為。

述曰：還沒有解釋『故說』二字。先解釋『一切法』。能取和所取的本體是沒有的，所以不是有，也不是無為。依他起性和圓成實性的本體是有的，所以名為一切法。雖然沒有也不會失去它自身的體性。不是法則就不能稱為法。這裡所說的法，是可以執持的。能取和所取的空性就是真如（Tathata）的空性。

論曰：依據前面的道理……乃至……非空非不空。

述曰：這就是解釋頌中的『故說』二字，並且想要顯示頌的第二句。依據前面頌中所說的道理，所以般若等經典說這兩種自性，一切的法名為非空非不空。什麼叫做非空？

論曰：由於有空性……乃至……所以說非空。

述曰：這就是說兩種自性的本體不是沒有的，所以叫做非空。什麼叫做非不空？

論曰：由於沒有所取……乃至……說非不空。

述曰：遍計所執性（Parikalpita）的能取和所取是沒有的，所以說非不空。非不空，本體是空無的意思。這是解釋有和無，也就是第二句頌。

論曰：有故……乃至……虛妄分別故。

述曰：所說的第三句，下面的『故』字貫通上面的三種情況，即有故、無故以及有故。這是解釋有故。兩種自性為什麼非空？因為是有。用這個來顯示前面非空的法體，就是前面頌中的虛妄分別和空性有。

【English Translation】 English version: Question: Are the two natures existent? Answer: Because of knowing them as they truly are, one can display the aspect of emptiness (sunyata) without inversion. On the dependently arisen nature (paratantra-svabhava), the grasper and the grasped are empty and non-existent. The true emptiness nature (sunyata-svabhava) is existent. Therefore, one can display emptiness without inversion. The term 'display' is another way of stating the principle of emptiness. Therefore, the other assertions that the three natures are non-existent deeply harm themselves (their own view), which will be explained in detail later.

Treatise: Furthermore, the verse says... until... this is in accordance with the Middle Way.

Commentary: This verse arises to re-establish the previous meaning. The term 'therefore it is said' means that the Prajna (wisdom) sutras and other scriptures say this. As stated in the second and third lines.

Treatise: All dharmas... until... are called unconditioned (asamskrta).

Commentary: The words 'therefore it is said' have not yet been explained. First, explain 'all dharmas'. The substance of the grasper and the grasped is non-existent, so it is neither existent nor unconditioned. The substance of the dependent and perfected natures are existent, so they are called all dharmas. Although it is non-existent, it does not lose its own essence. If it is not a rule, it cannot be called a dharma. The dharma mentioned here can be upheld. The emptiness nature of the grasper and the grasped is the emptiness nature of Suchness (Tathata).

Treatise: Based on the previous principle... until... neither empty nor not empty.

Commentary: This explains the words 'therefore it is said' in the verse, and also intends to reveal the second line of the verse. Based on the principle stated in the previous verse, the Prajna sutras and other scriptures say that these two natures, all dharmas, are called neither empty nor not empty. What is called not empty?

Treatise: Because there is emptiness nature... until... therefore it is said not empty.

Commentary: This means that the substance of the two natures is not non-existent, so it is called not empty. What is called not not empty?

Treatise: Because there is no grasped... until... it is said not not empty.

Commentary: The grasper and the grasped of the completely imputed nature (Parikalpita) are non-existent, so it is said not not empty. Not not empty means that the substance is empty and non-existent. This explains existence and non-existence, which is the second line of the verse.

Treatise: Because there is... until... due to false discrimination.

Commentary: The 'because' in the third line connects to the three situations above, namely, because there is, because there is not, and because there is. This explains 'because there is'. Why are the two natures not empty? Because they are existent. This is used to reveal the substance of the non-empty dharma mentioned earlier, which is the false discrimination and the existence of emptiness nature in the previous verse.

曰。無故者至能取二性故。

述曰。此釋無故。遍計所執何為非不空。以體無故顯無體也。即前頌中於此二都無也。

論曰。及有故者至有妄分別故。

述曰。二性雖有。互相有也。即前頌中下二句也。

論曰。是則契中道至妙契中道。

述曰。由有有無二種法故。一切諸法非皆有空。則契中道。中謂非邊。道者真智。此理妙故合真智。又言道游履之義。即是真如智所游履。此中所說有無義趣妙合真如大道理也。離於過失故言中道。舊云是名中道義者非也。

論曰。亦善符順至非空非有。

述曰。前顯此說諸法有無合於理智。今明此論亦善符經。

論曰。如是已顯至今當說。

述曰。義后結前有無。先許而起頌也。前之二頌已依虛妄分別說三性之有無。自下當說虛妄分別所有自體。此有二頌。初頌出相。后頌釋成。

論頌曰。至境無故識無。

述曰。上之二句明妄分別所變之境有依他用。下之二句顯依他起執境識是無。舊雲根塵我及識本識生似彼者。不然。所以者何。非是本識能緣變我及與識也。若許變者。即違彼舊論長行。長行自釋云。似我者。謂意識與我見無明等相應故。似識者。謂六種識此猶不然。應言變為所了。所了者。謂六境。相粗

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：

說：『無故』是指由於能夠執取兩種自性（二性）的緣故。

述記說：這裡解釋『無故』。遍計所執性為什麼不是不空呢？因為它的體性是虛無的，所以顯示它是沒有實體的。這就是前面頌文中所說的『於此二都無』的意思。

論說：『及有故者』是指兩種自性雖然存在，但它們是互相依存而存在的。因為有依他起性和圓成實性。

述記說：兩種自性雖然存在，但它們是互相依存而存在的。這就是前面頌文中的下面兩句所說的意思。

論說：這樣就契合了中道，微妙地契合了中道。

述記說：由於有有和無兩種法，所以一切諸法不是都空，這樣就契合了中道。『中』是指不偏於任何一邊，『道』是指真智。這個道理非常微妙，所以能契合真智。而且，『道』有遊歷的含義，也就是真如智所遊歷的地方。這裡所說的有和無的義理，微妙地契合了真如的大道理。遠離了過失，所以稱為中道。舊譯說『是名中道義』是不對的。

論說：也很好地符合和順了經典，既不是空也不是有。

述記說：前面顯示這種說法，諸法的有和無符合于理智。現在說明這個論述也很好地符合了經典。

論說：像這樣已經顯示了有和無的道理，現在應當說虛妄分別。

述記說：在義理之後總結前面的有無，先允許有有無，然後才開始頌文。前面的兩個頌文已經依據虛妄分別說了三性的有無。從下面開始，應當說虛妄分別所有的自體。這裡有兩頌，第一頌是顯示相狀，第二頌是解釋和成立。

論頌說：由於所緣的境界不存在，所以能緣的識也不存在。

述記說：上面的兩句說明虛妄分別所變現的境界具有依他起的作用。下面的兩句顯示依他起性所執著的境界和識是虛無的。舊譯說『根塵我及識，本識生似彼』是不對的。為什麼呢？因為不是本識能夠緣變我以及識。如果允許本識能變現這些，就違背了他們舊論的論述。舊論的論述自己解釋說：『相似於我』，是指意識與我見、無明等相應的緣故。『相似於識』，是指六種識。這樣說還是不對的，應當說是變為所了知的境界。所了知的境界，是指六境，相狀是粗顯的。

【English Translation】 English version:

It is said: 'Without cause' means because it is able to grasp two natures (two self-natures).

Commentary says: This explains 'without cause.' Why is the completely dependently imputed nature not non-empty? Because its substance is non-existent, it shows that it has no substance. This is what the previous verse meant by 'in these two, there is nothing.'

Treatise says: 'And with cause' means that although the two natures exist, they exist interdependently. Because there are dependent arising nature and perfectly established nature.

Commentary says: Although the two natures exist, they exist interdependently. This is what the last two lines of the previous verse said.

Treatise says: Thus, it accords with the Middle Way, subtly accords with the Middle Way.

Commentary says: Because there are two kinds of dharmas, existence and non-existence, not all dharmas are empty, thus it accords with the Middle Way. 'Middle' means not leaning to any side, 'Way' means true wisdom. This principle is very subtle, so it can accord with true wisdom. Moreover, 'Way' has the meaning of traveling, that is, the place where true wisdom travels. The meaning of existence and non-existence mentioned here subtly accords with the great principle of Suchness. It is free from faults, so it is called the Middle Way. The old translation saying 'this is called the meaning of the Middle Way' is incorrect.

Treatise says: It also well conforms and accords with the sutras, neither empty nor existent.

Commentary says: The previous explanation shows that this statement, the existence and non-existence of dharmas, accords with reason and wisdom. Now it is explained that this treatise also well conforms to the sutras.

Treatise says: As such, existence and non-existence have already been shown, now we should speak of the conceptual construction.

Commentary says: After the meaning, it summarizes the previous existence and non-existence, first allowing existence and non-existence, and then starting the verse. The previous two verses have already spoken of the existence and non-existence of the three natures based on conceptual construction. From below, we should speak of the self-nature of conceptual construction. There are two verses here, the first verse is to show the appearance, and the second verse is to explain and establish it.

Verse says: Because the object of perception does not exist, the perceiving consciousness does not exist.

Commentary says: The above two lines explain that the object transformed by conceptual construction has the function of dependent arising. The following two lines show that the object and consciousness grasped by the dependent arising nature are non-existent. The old translation saying 'roots, dust, self, and consciousness, the fundamental consciousness arises similar to them' is incorrect. Why? Because it is not the fundamental consciousness that can perceive and transform the self and consciousness. If it is allowed that the fundamental consciousness can transform these, it would violate their old treatise. The old treatise itself explains: 'Similar to the self' means that the consciousness is corresponding with the view of self, ignorance, etc. 'Similar to consciousness' means the six kinds of consciousness. This is still incorrect, it should be said that it is transformed into what is known. What is known refers to the six objects, the appearance is coarse.

故。若許緣我識者。又違瑜伽抉擇說阿賴耶識緣有根身相名分別種子及器世間。此則違教。若違理者。應所緣心不能緣慮。相分心故。如化心等。又緣我者。第八本識應許亦與見癡相應。入見道等無漏觀時。此識應轉。違無漏故。由此理故。舊頌說非。長行乃是。然真諦法師似朋一意識師意。所以頌中但言本識。長行乃別開之。余釋頌文。長行自屬。不勞煩。

論曰。變似義者至五根性現。

述曰。釋頌中變似義有情二事也。若安慧等舊解乃云唯自證分無相見者。即第八識心皆能有執。此似根境。皆體是無。似情有故名為似也。護法等云。此相分根境亦是依他。所言似。此體非實有。虛妄顯現似計所執體實有法。故立似名說於五根名有情者。梵云薩埵。此言有情。五根是別成根有情名有情也。似自他身五根現者。此中二說。如唯識論第三卷說。問以舊論變自根境。乃言本識。今則無也。答二執本無故。又安慧云。不同七六識出其名者。以此第八境粗識細。不明其見但明其相。其七六識見相自粗。但隨見說說其見行。然頌中言識生變似義。應合有識。而釋家略。三本梵文勘之皆同。

論曰。變似我者至恒相應故。

述曰。此釋頌中第二識生變似我也。與心所俱多少義等如成唯識。

論曰

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：因此，如果允許緣『我』之識存在，那就違背了《瑜伽師地論·抉擇分》所說，阿賴耶識緣著有根身（指具有感覺器官的身體）、相名分別種子以及器世間（指物質世界）的說法。這便是違背了教義。如果說違背了理，那麼所緣的心就不能緣慮，因為它只是相分心，就像幻化出來的心一樣。此外，如果緣『我』，那麼第八本識也應該被允許與見（錯誤的見解）和癡（愚癡）相應。在進入見道等無漏觀的時候，這個識應該轉變，因為它違背了無漏的性質。由於這個道理，舊的頌文說法是不對的，長行才是正確的。然而，真諦法師似乎傾向於一意識師的觀點，所以在頌文中只說了本識，而長行才特別地開出阿賴耶識。其餘解釋頌文和長行的部分，就不用多費筆墨了。

論曰：變現出相似於義（事物）的，乃至五根的性質顯現。

述曰：解釋頌文中變現出相似於義和有情兩件事。如果按照安慧等舊的解釋，認為只有自證分而沒有相見分，那麼第八識的心就都能夠有執著，這些相似於根境的事物，其本體都是虛無的。因為相似於有情，所以稱為『似』。護法等人認為，這個相分的根境也是依他起的。所說的『似』，是指它的本體並非真實存在，而是虛妄顯現，類似於計所執的本體實有之法。因此立名為『似』，並說五根名為有情。梵語『薩埵』（Sattva），這裡翻譯為『有情』。五根是分別成就根的有情，所以名為有情。變現出相似於自身和他身五根的顯現，這裡有兩種說法。如《成唯識論》第三卷所說。問：如果按照舊論變現出自身的根境，那麼就只說是本識，現在卻沒有了呢？答：因為兩種執著本來就沒有。此外，安慧說：不同於第七識和第六識說出它們的名字，是因為第八識的境界粗糙而識體微細，不明顯地說它的見分，而只明顯地說它的相分。而第七識和第六識的見分和相分都比較粗糙，所以只隨著見分來說，說它的見行。然而，頌文中說『識生變似義』，應該合起來說『有識』，但是解釋的人省略了。三個梵文字勘校之後都是一樣的。

論曰：變現出相似於『我』的，乃至恒常相應。

述曰：這是解釋頌文中第二句『識生變似我』。與心所俱起，多少和意義等同於《成唯識論》中的說法。

論曰：

【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, if we allow the existence of a consciousness that cognizes a 'self', it would contradict the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra, specifically the chapter on Determination (Viniscaya-samgrahanī), which states that the Ālaya-vijñāna (storehouse consciousness) cognizes the seeds of the rooted body (referring to the body with sense organs), name-and-form distinctions, and the receptacle world (referring to the material world). This would be a violation of the teachings. If it is said to violate reason, then the cognizing mind would be unable to cognize, because it is merely a semblance-aspect mind, like an illusory mind. Furthermore, if it cognizes a 'self', then the eighth fundamental consciousness should also be allowed to be associated with wrong views (dṛṣṭi) and ignorance (moha). When entering the path of seeing (darśana-mārga) and other uncontaminated (anāsrava) contemplations, this consciousness should transform, because it contradicts the nature of being uncontaminated. Due to this reasoning, the old verse is incorrect, and the prose commentary is correct. However, the Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha seems to lean towards the view of the one-consciousness school, so in the verse he only mentioned the fundamental consciousness, while the prose commentary specifically introduces the Ālaya-vijñāna. The rest of the explanation of the verse and the prose commentary need not be elaborated further.

Treatise says: Transforming into what resembles objects, up to the manifestation of the nature of the five sense faculties.

Commentary says: Explaining the two things in the verse: transforming into what resembles objects and sentient beings. If according to the old interpretations of Ānanda and others, who believe that there is only self-awareness (svasaṃvedana) and no object-awareness (viṣaya-vijñāna), then the mind of the eighth consciousness would be able to have attachments, and these things that resemble sense objects, their essence would be empty. Because it resembles sentient beings, it is called 'resemblance'. Dharmapāla and others believe that this semblance-aspect of sense objects is also dependently arisen (paratantra). The 'resemblance' refers to its essence not being truly existent, but falsely appearing, similar to the truly existent dharma of the completely imputed nature (parikalpita). Therefore, the name 'resemblance' is established, and the five sense faculties are called sentient beings. The Sanskrit word 'Sattva' (Sattva) is translated here as 'sentient being'. The five sense faculties are the sentient beings that separately accomplish the faculties, so they are called sentient beings. Transforming into the appearance of one's own and others' five sense faculties, there are two explanations here. As stated in the third volume of the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi-śāstra. Question: If according to the old treatise, one's own sense objects are transformed, then it only says fundamental consciousness, but now it doesn't? Answer: Because the two attachments originally did not exist. Furthermore, Ānanda says: It is different from the seventh and sixth consciousnesses stating their names, because the eighth consciousness's realm is coarse and its consciousness is subtle, not clearly stating its awareness-aspect, but only clearly stating its object-aspect. And the awareness-aspect and object-aspect of the seventh and sixth consciousnesses are both relatively coarse, so it only follows the awareness-aspect to speak, speaking of its awareness-activity. However, the verse says 'consciousness arises transforming into what resembles objects', it should be combined to say 'with consciousness', but the explainer omitted it. After examining the three Sanskrit texts, they are all the same.

Treatise says: Transforming into what resembles 'self', up to constantly associated.

Commentary says: This is explaining the second line in the verse 'consciousness arises transforming into what resembles self'. Arising together with mental factors, the quantity and meaning are the same as in the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi-śāstra.

Treatise says:

。變似了者至了相粗故。

述曰。明第三識生變似所了。雖前二識亦變所了。以相細故。唯此得名。雖第六識亦變為我與我癡等。非恒俱故。獨七得名。雖餘六識亦變根器。非是本故。不相續故。行相粗故。唯八得名。

論曰。此境實非有至皆非實有。

述曰。此解前三識境皆非實有。此中有二比量。第八識所變似義似根。是有法。皆非實有。是法法通二量故。單后說因云。無行相故。以此二體非能緣法故無行相。舊云非形識故翻之錯也。喻云。如龜毛等。然凈真如雖無行。而談實體非實不實。故無不定過。然安慧等即以此文定相分。相分必是計所執故。此中論云非實有故。護法等依第八變依他根境。執為實有。體非實有。非第八相分體是無也。第二量云。似我似了皆非實有。宗也。因云。非真現故。舊云。不如境故。喻云。如兔角等。然我必是一常。現見有生滅異。所了謂是常實。不久並見無常。如所緣情不稱所見。如緣夢境故。今總以非真現因成非實有。無不定過隨一不成。又此似因。應更成立。文外少字。應致許言。以自許是非真現故。如空華等。若是真現。應是常法。此中所了二解同前。

論曰。境無故識無者至亦非實有。

述曰。前成境非有。此成心無。舊論文意先遣所執

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：因為變現的相似性導致了對粗顯表象的執著。

述記中說：闡明了第三識（阿賴耶識）生起時變現出所了知的對象。雖然前兩個識（眼識和耳識）也變現所了知的對象，但因為它們的表象非常細微，所以只有第三識才因此得名。雖然第六識（意識）也變現為『我』和『我癡』等，但因為不是恒常同時生起，所以只有第七識（末那識）才因此得名。雖然其餘六識也變現根身和器界，但因為它們不是根本的，不相續，並且行相粗顯，所以只有第八識（阿賴耶識）才因此得名。

論中說：這些境象實際上並不存在，一切都不是真實存在的。

述記中說：這裡解釋了前三個識所緣的境都不是真實存在的。這裡有兩個比量：第八識所變現的似義似根，是有法（dharmin），都不是真實存在的，這是法法相通的兩種比量。單獨用後面的理由來說，是因為『沒有行相』。因為這兩個自體不是能緣之法，所以沒有行相。舊譯說『不是形識』是錯誤的翻譯。例如龜毛等。然而，清凈真如雖然沒有行相，但討論的是實體，並非既非真實也非不真實，所以沒有不確定的過失。然而，安慧等人就用這段文字來確定相分（nimitta-bhāga），認為相分必定是遍計所執性（parikalpita）。這裡論中說『不是真實存在的』。護法等人依據第八識所變的依他起性（paratantra）的根境，執著為真實存在。體不是真實存在的，並非第八識的相分體是無。第二個比量是：似『我』似『了』都不是真實存在的，這是宗（paksha）。原因是『不是真實的顯現』。舊譯說『不如境』。例如兔角等。然而，『我』必定是一個常一之物，現在見到有生滅變化。所『了』認為是常實的，不久也見到是無常的。如同所緣的境不符合所見到的情況，如同緣夢境一樣。現在總以『非真現』作為原因，成立『非實有』，沒有不確定的過失，隨一不成。而且，這個『似』的原因，應該進一步成立。文外缺少字，應該補充『許』字，因為自己承認是非真實的顯現。如同空中的花朵等。如果是真實的顯現，應該是常法。這裡所『了』的兩種解釋與前面相同。

論中說：因為境不存在，所以識也不存在，也不是真實存在的。

述記中說：前面成立了境不存在，這裡成立心也不存在。舊的論文意思是先遣除所執著。

【English Translation】 English version: The similarity in manifestation leads to attachment to coarse appearances.

The commentary states: It clarifies that when the third consciousness (Ālaya-vijñāna) arises, it manifests the objects that are cognized. Although the first two consciousnesses (eye-consciousness and ear-consciousness) also manifest cognized objects, only the third consciousness is named as such because their appearances are very subtle. Although the sixth consciousness (mind-consciousness) also manifests 『self』 and 『self-ignorance』 etc., only the seventh consciousness (Manas-vijñāna) is named as such because they do not arise constantly and simultaneously. Although the remaining six consciousnesses also manifest the roots and the world, only the eighth consciousness (Ālaya-vijñāna) is named as such because they are not fundamental, not continuous, and their appearances are coarse.

The treatise states: These objects are actually non-existent; everything is not truly existent.

The commentary states: Here it explains that the objects of the first three consciousnesses are not truly existent. There are two inferences here: The meaning and roots that are manifested by the eighth consciousness, which are the subject (dharmin), are not truly existent. These are two inferences that are universally applicable. Using the later reason alone, it is because 『there is no appearance』. Because these two entities are not the object-cognizing dharmas, they have no appearance. The old translation saying 『not form-consciousness』 is a wrong translation. For example, turtle hair etc. However, although pure Suchness (tathatā) has no appearance, it discusses the entity, which is neither truly existent nor non-truly existent, so there is no uncertain fault. However, Ānanda and others use this passage to determine the nimitta-bhāga (image-aspect), believing that the nimitta-bhāga must be the parikalpita (imagined nature). Here the treatise says 『not truly existent』. Dharmapāla and others rely on the roots and objects of the paratantra (dependent nature) transformed by the eighth consciousness, clinging to them as truly existent. The entity is not truly existent, it is not that the nimitta-bhāga of the eighth consciousness is non-existent. The second inference is: The seeming 『self』 and seeming 『cognized』 are not truly existent, this is the paksha (thesis). The reason is 『not a true manifestation』. The old translation says 『not like the object』. For example, rabbit horns etc. However, 『self』 must be a constant and singular thing, but now it is seen to have arising and ceasing changes. The 『cognized』 is considered to be constant and real, but soon it is also seen to be impermanent. Just as the object cognized does not match what is seen, just like cognizing a dream. Now, in general, 『not a true manifestation』 is used as the reason to establish 『not truly existent』, there is no uncertain fault, and none can be established. Moreover, this reason of 『seeming』 should be further established. There are missing words outside the text, the word 『allow』 should be added, because one admits that it is a non-true manifestation. Like flowers in the sky etc. If it were a true manifestation, it should be a constant dharma. The two explanations of 『cognized』 here are the same as before.

The treatise states: Because the object does not exist, the consciousness does not exist, and it is also not truly existent.

The commentary states: The previous established that the object does not exist, and this establishes that the mind does not exist. The old treatise meant to first eliminate what is clung to.

。后遣依他。皆不□□。此中亦是遣所執。如下論言。許滅於此得解脫故。但如暖頂遣境忍等遣心。非除依他。依能緣心執有能取。除此識也。量云。能緣實識體亦是無。因云。汝言境心二實法內隨一攝故。如汝四境。前非故得為喻。但言心境隨一所攝。恐有真如等為不定失。故此因遮。

論曰。複次頌曰至許滅解脫故。

述曰。此成前頌依他是有。頌中上十三字成妄分別體非實有。不同所執少分亦無。故下七字說許少有。以自所許滅妄分別得解脫故。舊論云此頌解名義者。非也。以下解相亦有九種無名義相故。

論曰。虛妄分別至亂識生故。

述曰。此即總釋頌之大綱亦非全無。下解妄分別少有其體。以上總解體非實有。以識之體有少妄亂識亦變似境等。不同所執無少分生。然彼舊論解虛妄名。境不實故。由體散亂故。今勘梵本。此是人語非是聖說。本無此也。

論曰。如何不許此性全無。

述曰。即假徴起設中百論師等難。彼師所計此亦全無。

論曰。以許此滅得解脫故。

述曰。此答前難。若如空華。少分非有。應無斷滅解脫義成。既解脫成有斷滅者。故妄分別定有少體。

論曰。若異此者至及清凈失。

述曰。若異於此少有其體。而說全無生

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：之後遣除依他起性，都不應當執著任何事物。這裡也是爲了遣除所執著的。如下面的論述所說：『因為允許滅除（妄分別），才能得到解脫。』但就像暖位、頂位遣除對境界的執著，忍位等遣除對心的執著一樣，並非是去除依他起性。依他起效能緣之心執著有能取，去除的是這個識。可以這樣論證：能緣的真實識體也是無自性的。因為你說境和心這兩種實法，任何一個都包含在其中。就像你所說的四境一樣。前面已經否定過，所以可以作為比喻。但只說心和境包含在其中任何一個，恐怕有真如等成為不定的過失，所以用這個因來遮止。論曰：複次，頌曰：至許滅解脫故。述曰：這是爲了成立前面的頌詞，依他起性是存在的。頌詞中前面的十三字，成立了妄分別的體性並非真實存在，和所執著的完全沒有少分相同。所以後面的七個字說允許少分存在，因為自己所允許的滅除妄分別才能得到解脫。舊論說這個頌詞解釋的是名義，是不對的。因為下面解釋相也有九種無名義相的緣故。論曰：虛妄分別至亂識生故。述曰：這總的解釋了頌詞的大綱，也不是完全沒有。下面解釋妄分別少分有其體性，上面總的解釋了體性並非真實存在。因為識的體性有少分的妄亂，識也會變化得像境界等，和所執著的沒有少分產生不同。然而舊論解釋虛妄的名字，是因為境界不真實，因為體性散亂的緣故。現在勘察梵本，這是人說的話，不是聖人說的，原本沒有這些。論曰：如何不許此性全無？述曰：這是假設提問，是中百論師等提出的疑問。那些論師認為這個（妄分別）也是完全沒有的。論曰：以許此滅得解脫故。述曰：這是回答前面的疑問。如果像空中的花朵一樣，少分都沒有，那麼斷滅和解脫的意義就無法成立。既然解脫能夠成立，有斷滅，所以妄分別一定有少分的體性。論曰：若異此者至及清凈失。述曰：如果和這少分有體性不同，而說完全沒有生

【English Translation】 English version: Afterwards, when eliminating the dependent nature (Paratantra-svabhava), one should not cling to anything. Here, too, it is to eliminate what is clung to. As the following treatise says: 'Because allowing the cessation (of false discrimination) leads to liberation.' But just as the stages of 'warmth' and 'peak' eliminate attachment to objects, and the stage of 'forbearance' eliminates attachment to the mind, it is not the removal of the dependent nature. The dependent-arising mind clings to the existence of the grasper (subject), and what is removed is this consciousness. It can be argued: The entity of the real consciousness that cognizes is also without inherent existence. The reason is: You say that either the object or the mind, these two real dharmas, are included within it. Like the four objects you mentioned. It has been negated before, so it can be used as a metaphor. But only saying that the mind and object are included in either one, there is a risk that Suchness (Tathata) etc. would become an uncertain fault, so this reason is used to prevent it. Treatise says: Furthermore, the verse says: to allowing cessation liberation therefore. Commentary says: This is to establish the previous verse, that the dependent nature exists. The first thirteen words of the verse establish that the nature of false discrimination is not truly existent, and there is no similarity with what is clung to. Therefore, the following seven words say that it allows a small part to exist, because one's own allowance of the cessation of false discrimination leads to liberation. The old treatise says that this verse explains the meaning of names, which is incorrect. Because the following explanation of characteristics also has nine kinds of aspects without the meaning of names. Treatise says: False discrimination to confused consciousness arises therefore. Commentary says: This generally explains the outline of the verse, and it is not completely without meaning. The following explains that false discrimination has a small part of its entity, and the above generally explains that the entity is not truly existent. Because the entity of consciousness has a small part of confusion, and consciousness also transforms to resemble objects, etc., which is different from what is clung to, where no small part arises. However, the old treatise explains the name of false discrimination, because the object is not real, because the entity is scattered. Now, examining the Sanskrit version, these are human words, not spoken by sages, and were not originally there. Treatise says: How can one not allow this nature to be completely non-existent? Commentary says: This is a hypothetical question, raised by the Madhyamika teachers, etc. Those teachers believe that this (false discrimination) is also completely non-existent. Treatise says: Because allowing its cessation leads to liberation. Commentary says: This is the answer to the previous question. If it were like flowers in the sky, with no small part existing, then the meaning of cessation and liberation could not be established. Since liberation can be established, and there is cessation, then false discrimination must have a small part of its entity. Treatise says: If it is different from this to and purity lost. Commentary says: If it is different from this small part having an entity, and one says that there is no arising at all

死繫縛出世解脫。則應皆無。以無體法不能繫縛。如石女兒。亦非斷已得成解脫。如第二月。若許全無無縛脫者。應無雜染亦無清凈。既違世間亦背聖說。又無染凈。汝等修道何所求為。

論曰。已顯虛妄至今當說。

述曰。此則義后結前。有許說而起頌。第三也。問依他圓成染凈殊別。與計所執有無不同。所言攝相其義安立。

論曰。但有如是至三種自性。

述曰。以妄分別為根本故。所以攝三。

論頌曰。唯所執依他至及二空故說。

述曰。上二句出三性。下二句成攝義。

論曰。依止虛妄至說有圓成實自性。

述曰。以下二句成上二句。妄分別境即計所執。能計之心即依他性依妄分別。二取空性即圓成實。故妄分別攝三性也。然此中量依止虛妄分別境故說計所執者。非是一切虛妄分別之境皆計所執。五八識中無有執故。但言計所執定妄分別境。故作此論。以妄分別體性寬故。遍計所執境能緣心狹故。此護法等之所分別。然安慧等以此證知八識皆能起計所執。如抉擇分。文同於此。如成唯識說二師計。然舊本說。初性體者。即是六塵永不可得猶如空華。由此本狹。非唯六塵故。又云。依他性者。謂唯亂識有非實故。猶如幻物。幻物是境少分亦無。何得引之以為

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：如果說死亡是擺脫束縛、獲得出世解脫的方式，那麼所有人都應該獲得解脫，因為不存在真實的束縛。就像石女的兒子一樣，本來就不存在，所以無從束縛。同樣，解脫也不是通過斷滅而獲得的，就像第二個月亮一樣，本來就是虛幻的。如果允許完全不存在束縛和解脫，那麼就不應該存在雜染和清凈。這既違背了世俗的常識，也背離了聖人的教誨。如果沒有雜染和清凈，你們修行是爲了什麼呢？

論曰：已經闡明了虛妄，現在應當繼續說明。

述曰：這是在義理之後總結前文，並引出頌文，是第三種情況。提問：依他起性和圓成實性在雜染和清凈方面有所不同，與遍計所執性的有無也不同，那麼所說的『攝相』，它的意義如何成立呢？

論曰：只有如是，乃至三種自性。

述曰：因為虛妄分別是根本，所以才能統攝三種自性。

論頌曰：唯有遍計所執、依他起性，乃至以及二空性，所以說統攝。

述曰：上面兩句說明了三種自性，下面兩句成就了統攝的意義。

論曰：依止虛妄分別的緣故，所以說有圓成實自性。

述曰：下面兩句是爲了成就上面兩句。虛妄分別的境界就是遍計所執性，能進行計度的心就是依他起性，依靠虛妄分別而顯現的二取空性就是圓成實性。所以說虛妄分別統攝了三種自性。然而，這裡所說的量，因為是依止虛妄分別的境界，所以才說遍計所執。並非一切虛妄分別的境界都是遍計所執，因為第五識和第八識中沒有執著。只能說遍計所執一定是虛妄分別的境界，所以才這樣論述。因為虛妄分別的體性寬廣，而遍計所執的境界和能緣的心狹窄。這是護法等人所作的分別。然而，安慧等人用此來證明八識都能生起遍計所執，如《抉擇分》所說，文句與此相同。如《成唯識論》所說的二師的計度。然而舊本說，初性體，就是六塵，永遠不可得，猶如空中的花朵。由此可見，舊本的說法過於狹隘，並非只有六塵。又說，依他起性，就是混亂的識，不是真實的，猶如幻化的事物。幻化的事物是境界，少分也沒有真實的，怎麼能用它來作為比喻呢？

【English Translation】 English version: If death is the means of escaping bondage and attaining supramundane liberation (Nirvana), then everyone should be liberated, since there is no real bondage. Like the son of a barren woman, it does not exist, so there is nothing to bind. Similarly, liberation is not attained through annihilation, like the second moon, which is illusory. If it is allowed that there is absolutely no bondage and liberation, then there should be no defilement (Klesha) and no purity (Vishuddhi). This contradicts both worldly common sense and the teachings of the saints. If there is no defilement and purity, what are you practicing for?

Treatise: Having already explained the illusory, now we should continue to explain.

Commentary: This is summarizing the previous text after the meaning and introducing the verse, which is the third case. Question: The dependent nature (Paratantra-svabhava) and the perfected nature (Parinishpanna-svabhava) differ in terms of defilement and purity, and also differ from the existence or non-existence of the completely imputed nature (Parikalpita-svabhava). So, how is the meaning of 'encompassing the characteristics' established?

Treatise: There are only such, up to the three natures.

Commentary: Because false discrimination (Kalpana) is the root, it encompasses the three natures.

Verse: Only the completely imputed, the dependent, up to and including the two emptinesses, therefore it is said to encompass.

Commentary: The first two lines explain the three natures, and the last two lines establish the meaning of encompassing.

Treatise: Because of relying on false discrimination, it is said that there is the perfected nature.

Commentary: The last two lines are to establish the first two lines. The object of false discrimination is the completely imputed nature, the mind that performs the imputation is the dependent nature, and the emptiness of the two graspings that appears relying on false discrimination is the perfected nature. Therefore, false discrimination encompasses the three natures. However, the measure mentioned here, because it relies on the object of false discrimination, it is said to be completely imputed. Not all objects of false discrimination are completely imputed, because there is no attachment in the fifth and eighth consciousnesses. It can only be said that the completely imputed is definitely the object of false discrimination, so it is discussed in this way. Because the nature of false discrimination is broad, while the object and the mind that can grasp the completely imputed are narrow. This is the distinction made by Dharmapala and others. However, Ananda and others use this to prove that the eight consciousnesses can all give rise to the completely imputed, as stated in the Vyākaraṇa-anāgamana, the wording is the same as this. As the two teachers' calculations mentioned in the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi. However, the old version says that the initial nature is the six sense objects (Shad-ayatana), which are forever unattainable, like flowers in the sky. From this, it can be seen that the old version's statement is too narrow, not only the six sense objects. It also says that the dependent nature is the confused consciousness, which is not real, like illusory things. Illusory things are objects, and there is no reality in even a small part of them, so how can it be used as a metaphor?

同喻。又云。真實性者。謂二取無所有。真實有無故。猶如虛空。虛空大乘非有。同喻所立不成。由此準知。雖少有比量。而不善能立。雖少為分別。而增長本文。故今論者依本無失。

論曰。已顯虛妄至入無相方便相。

述曰。義后結前。有許說而生下。第四門也。然入無相方便必以分別為觀心。亦以為境故。即于妄分別說入方便也。

論頌曰。依識有所得至識無所得生。

述曰。此有二頌。初頌解方便道所能取無。后頌解根本道二無平等。即見道等此即初也。上二句許心有而境無。即暖頂位下二句說境無而識亦無。即忍等位。舊論云以塵無有體本識即不生者。非也。豈許七識生也。

論曰。依止唯識至後有于識無所得生。

述曰。此則總釋頌之大綱。隨頌散解。其文易解。皆除所執。如處處說。

論曰。是方便至能取無相。

述曰。結成前義也。

論曰。複次頌曰至無得性平等。

述曰。此頌解二無平等。上二句解平等理。下二句結成平等。

論曰。唯識生時至名有所得。

述曰。解頌初句說識有得之所由。

論曰。以所得境至亦不得成。

述曰。解第二句。由境無故顯識亦無。亦者亦境無也。

論曰。由能得識

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：同喻。又說，『真實性』是指二取（能取和所取）都不存在，因為真實既非有也非無，就像虛空一樣。虛空在大乘中並非實有，因此同喻的立論不能成立。由此可以推知，即使有少許比量，也不能善於立論；即使有少許分別，也會增長文字。所以現在的論者依據原本沒有過失。

論曰：已經顯示虛妄直到進入無相的方便之相。

述曰：在意義之後總結前面，因為有允許說而產生後面的內容。這是第四個門。然而，進入無相的方便，必定以分別作為觀心的對象，也作為觀境，所以就在虛妄分別中說進入方便。

論頌曰：依靠識而有所得，直到識無所得生。

述曰：這裡有兩首頌。第一首頌解釋方便道所能取之無，第二首頌解釋根本道二無平等，即見道等。這即是第一首。上面兩句允許心有而境無，即暖位和頂位；下面兩句說境無而識也無，即忍位等。舊論說『因為塵無有體，所以本識就不生』，這是不對的。難道允許七識生起嗎？

論曰：依靠唯識，直到後來在識中無所得生。

述曰：這是總的解釋頌的大綱，隨著頌文分散解釋，其文容易理解，都是去除所執著，如處處所說。

論曰：這是方便，直到能取無相。

述曰：總結前面的意義。

論曰：再次頌曰，直到無得性平等。

述曰：這首頌解釋二無平等。上面兩句解釋平等之理，下面兩句總結平等。

論曰：唯識生起時，稱為有所得。

述曰：解釋頌的第一句，說明識有所得的原因。

論曰：因為所得的境不存在，所以識也不得成立。

述曰：解釋第二句。因為境不存在，所以顯示識也不存在。『亦』字也表示境不存在。

論曰：由於能得的識……

【English Translation】 English version: It is analogous. Furthermore, it is said that 'reality' means that both the grasper (subject) and the grasped (object) are non-existent, because reality is neither existent nor non-existent, just like space. Space is not truly existent in Mahayana, therefore the analogy does not hold. From this, it can be inferred that even if there is a slight amount of inference, it cannot skillfully establish a thesis; even if there is a slight amount of discrimination, it will increase the text. Therefore, the present commentator relies on the original text without error.

Treatise says: It has already revealed the falsity up to entering the aspect of expedient of no-appearance (nirakara).

Commentary says: Summarizing the preceding after the meaning, because there is permission to speak and generate the following content. This is the fourth gate. However, entering the expedient of no-appearance must use discrimination as the object of contemplation of the mind, and also as the object of observation, so it is said in false discrimination to enter the expedient.

Treatise verse says: Relying on consciousness to have something obtained, until consciousness without obtaining arises.

Commentary says: Here are two verses. The first verse explains the non-existence that can be grasped by the expedient path, and the second verse explains the equality of the two non-existences of the fundamental path, that is, the path of seeing (darshana-marga) and so on. This is the first verse. The upper two lines allow the mind to exist but the object to not exist, that is, the positions of warmth (ushmagata) and peak (murdhan); the lower two lines say that the object does not exist and consciousness also does not exist, that is, the positions of forbearance (kshanti) and so on. The old treatise says 'Because the dust has no substance, the fundamental consciousness does not arise', which is incorrect. Does it allow the seven consciousnesses to arise?

Treatise says: Relying on only-consciousness, until later the non-obtaining in consciousness arises.

Commentary says: This is a general explanation of the outline of the verse, scattered explanations follow the verse, the text is easy to understand, all are removing what is clung to, as said everywhere.

Treatise says: This is the expedient, until the grasper is without appearance.

Commentary says: Concluding the preceding meaning.

Treatise says: Again, the verse says, until the equality of non-obtaining nature.

Commentary says: This verse explains the equality of the two non-existences. The upper two lines explain the principle of equality, and the lower two lines conclude equality.

Treatise says: When only-consciousness arises, it is called having something obtained.

Commentary says: Explaining the first line of the verse, explaining the reason why consciousness has something obtained.

Treatise says: Because the obtained object does not exist, consciousness also cannot be established.

Commentary says: Explaining the second line. Because the object does not exist, it shows that consciousness also does not exist. The word 'also' also indicates that the object does not exist.

Treatise says: Because of the obtaining consciousness...

至無所得性。

述曰。以能得識同境無故。能取所取先有得今皆成無。非一獨無故名平等。

論曰。顯入虛妄至今次當說。

述曰。結前生后二門義也。差別約界豎論。異門約行橫說。

論頌曰。三界心心所至亦別名心所。

述曰。上二句解差別相。舊本云總相。非也。上二句解異門。舊論云別相。非也。王所同名差別。王所異名異門。

論曰。虛妄分別至諸心心所。

述曰。此解頌上二句差別相。八識俱然也。

論曰。異門相者至諸心所法。

述曰。此解下二句異門相。心王與所行相同異。王唯總取。臣取總別。如瑜伽第三及顯揚十八唯識第五卷等說。然初一虛妄分別之言通二門用。余文可知。舊論但言心所取別。不言取總。違瑜伽等說。

論曰。今次當說此生起相。

述曰。次第八門許說生下。

論頌曰。一則名緣識至分別推心所。

述曰。頌上二句明識生起。頌下二句明心所生。

論曰。緣識者至生緣故。

述曰。此釋頌中第一句也。即始牒文而後申義。此辯現行生起之相。非種子識。設說種子。無理能違。以是根本不名受者。

論曰。藏識為緣至名為受者。

述曰。此釋頌中第二句也。即先申義

而後牒文。即七轉識皆名受者。以受用境受數用勝。識從俱時之受立受者名。即鄰近釋。皆非根本併名受者。

論曰。此諸識中至故名心所。

述曰。此釋頌中下二句也。此諸第一第二識中能受用境。是受功力。能分別境相貌之用。是想功能。能推於心于所緣境能有種種行相用者。思作意等之功力也。舊論云。能令心舍此取彼。思等力故。此受想行三蘊助成於心緣境之事。文名心所。解心所名此如攝論等第三卷解。

論曰。今次當說此雜染相。

述曰。明妄分別第九染門。許說生下。

論頌曰。覆障及安立至由虛妄分別。

述曰。初之六句正辯緣生。下之二句明諸雜染。解緣生中。初有五句別釋緣生。次有一句釋明深義。辯雜染中。初句明三二七染。后句明染所由。屬當判文長行易了。

論曰。覆障故者至障真見故。

述曰。辯覆障義。初緣起支。由癡覆境智不得生。無明蔽心不能照理。既雙隱蔽立覆障名。舊論唯說障見者非。此中通說一切無明。二種業攝非所知障。障真見者是無明支。或煩惱障亦障見故。此中通說。對法等說有二種愚。瑜伽等說七無知等。皆不離斯。

論曰。安立故者至業熏習故。

述曰。即是行支。謂由三行熏于第八。于本識中

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本而後，牒文說，第七轉識都可稱為『受者』（Vedaka，感受者），因為它能感受和利用外境，並且在感受的數量和作用上都勝過其他識。識從同時產生的感受中獲得『受者』的名稱，這是一種鄰近的解釋。其他的識都不是根本的，不能都被稱為『受者』。

論曰：這些識中，之所以稱為『心所』（Caitta，心所），是因為...

述曰：這是解釋頌文中的后兩句。在第一和第二識中，能夠感受和利用外境的是『受』（Vedana，感受）的功能；能夠分別外境的相貌和作用的是『想』（Samjna，表象）的功能；能夠推動心識對所緣境產生種種行相作用的是『思』（Cetana，意志）和『作意』（Manaskara，注意）等的功能。舊論說，『能令心舍此取彼』，是因為『思』等的作用。這『受』、『想』、『行』（Samskara，行）三蘊幫助成就心識緣取外境的事情，因此稱為『心所』。關於『心所』名稱的解釋，可以參考《攝大乘論》等第三卷。

論曰：現在接下來應當說這種雜染相。

述曰：說明妄分別的第九種染污之門，允許從生以下開始說。

論頌曰：覆障及安立，乃至由虛妄分別。

述曰：最初的六句是正面辨析緣起，下面的兩句說明各種雜染。在解釋緣起中，最初有五句分別解釋緣起，其次有一句解釋說明深奧的含義。在辨析雜染中，第一句說明三、二、七種染污，后一句說明染污的由來。判別經文歸屬，長行文很容易理解。

論曰：『覆障故』（蔽障之故），是因為...，障真見故（障礙真實見解之故）。

述曰：辨析覆障的含義。最初是緣起支。由於愚癡覆蓋了外境，智慧無法產生。無明遮蔽了心識，無法照亮真理。既然同時隱蔽了外境和心識，就立名為『覆障』。舊論只說『障見』是不全面的，這裡是通說一切無明。兩種業所攝，不是所知障。『障真見者』是無明支，或者煩惱障也障礙見解，因此這裡是通說。對法等論說有兩種愚癡，瑜伽等論說七種無知等，都不離這些。

論曰：『安立故』（安立之故），是因為...，業熏習故（業力熏習之故）。

述曰：這就是行支。由身、語、意三行熏習于第八識，在本識中...

【English Translation】 English version Then, the document states that the seventh consciousness (轉識, zhuan shi) is called 'Experiencer' (受者, shou zhe) because it experiences and utilizes objects, surpassing other consciousnesses in the quantity and function of experiencing. The name 'Experiencer' is derived from the simultaneous experience, which is a proximate explanation. Other consciousnesses are not fundamental and cannot all be called 'Experiencer'.

Treatise says: Among these consciousnesses, they are called 'Mental Factors' (心所, xin suo) because...

Commentary says: This explains the last two lines of the verse. In the first and second consciousnesses, the ability to experience and utilize objects is the function of 'Feeling' (受, shou); the ability to distinguish the appearance and function of objects is the function of 'Perception' (想, xiang); the ability to drive consciousness to produce various aspects of action on the object is the function of 'Volition' (思, si) and 'Attention' (作意, zuo yi). The old treatise says, 'It can make the mind abandon this and take that' because of the function of 'Volition' and others. These three aggregates of 'Feeling', 'Perception', and 'Volition' help to accomplish the mind's grasping of objects, so they are called 'Mental Factors'. For an explanation of the name 'Mental Factors', refer to the third volume of the Treatise on the Summary of the Great Vehicle and others.

Treatise says: Now, next, we should talk about this aspect of defilement.

Commentary says: Explaining the ninth door of defilement of false discrimination, allowing to speak from birth onwards.

Verse says: Covering and obstructing, and establishing, even by false discrimination.

Commentary says: The first six lines are a direct analysis of dependent origination, and the following two lines explain various defilements. In explaining dependent origination, the first five lines separately explain dependent origination, and the next line explains the profound meaning. In analyzing defilements, the first line explains the three, two, and seven types of defilements, and the last line explains the origin of defilements. Determining the attribution of the scriptures, the prose text is easy to understand.

Treatise says: 'Covering and obstructing' (覆障故, fu zhang gu) is because..., obstructing true seeing (障真見故, zhang zhen jian gu).

Commentary says: Analyzing the meaning of covering and obstructing. The first is the branch of dependent origination. Because ignorance covers the object, wisdom cannot arise. Ignorance obscures the mind, unable to illuminate the truth. Since both the object and the mind are simultaneously concealed, it is named 'Covering and Obstructing'. The old treatise only saying 'obstructing seeing' is incomplete; here it is a general discussion of all ignorance. The two types of karma are not included in the obstacles to knowledge. 'Obstructing true seeing' is the branch of ignorance, or the afflictive obstacles also obstruct seeing, so here it is a general discussion. The Abhidharma and other treatises say there are two types of foolishness, the Yoga and other treatises say seven types of ignorance, etc., all are inseparable from these.

Treatise says: 'Establishing' (安立故, an li gu) is because..., the force of karma's habituation (業熏習故, ye xun xi gu).

Commentary says: This is the volitional action branch. The three actions of body, speech, and mind habituate the eighth consciousness, in the fundamental consciousness...

種植業之習氣。故名安立。成唯識說。唯總報業及總別行名為行支。

論曰。將導故者至至生處故。

述曰。此釋識支。瑜伽第九通取六識。九十三說及成唯識皆唯第八。異熟主故。最初生時能為導首將業果往彼生處。立將導名。舊論說謂本識及意識者非也。主非餘七。通不唯意。故成非理。對法等說。識為能引。即名色支名為所引。所望別故亦不相違。

論曰。攝故者至自體故。

述曰。謂名色支五蘊具足故名為攝。攝者攝持五蘊具足圓滿之義。

論曰。圓滿故者至體具足故。

述曰。釋六處支。

論曰。三分別故者至順三受故。

述曰。此解觸支。謂根境識非一名三。此觸令三分位差別順於三受。或時是樂至不苦樂。觸從功用以立其名。名三分別。此同對法觸釋家義。不同唯識。所望別故。然對法本文狀同唯識。釋家似同此處。

論曰。受用故者至非二境故。

述曰。此解受支。如文可解。然九十三等受有二種。一異熟二境界。如唯識說。以上五支總別體性不相雜亂。所有徴結皆如唯識。

論曰。引起故者至後有得起故。

述曰。此解愛支。如水潤故。對法等說是能生支。以立其名。雖取有支亦是能生。彼從勝義別立其名。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本種植業的習氣。因此稱為安立（Anli，建立）。《成唯識論》說，只有總報業和總別行才稱為行支。

論曰：『將導故者至至生處故。』

述曰：這是解釋識支。瑜伽行派在《瑜伽師地論》第九卷中普遍認為包括六識。《瑜伽師地論》第九十三卷和《成唯識論》都只認為是第八識（阿賴耶識），因為它是異熟的主體。最初出生時，它能作為引導者，將業果帶到投生之處，因此稱為將導。舊論說認為是本識和意識是不對的。主體不是其餘七識，普遍也不僅僅是意識，所以說是不合理的。《對法論》等說，識是能引，名色支是所引，因為所期望的不同，所以也不相違背。

論曰：『攝故者至自體故。』

述曰：意思是名色支五蘊具足，因此稱為攝。攝的意思是攝持五蘊，使其具足圓滿。

論曰：『圓滿故者至體具足故。』

述曰：這是解釋六處支。

論曰：『三分別故者至順三受故。』

述曰：這是解釋觸支。意思是根、境、識不是一個名稱，而是三個。這個觸使三分位產生差別，順應於三種感受，有時是樂受，乃至不苦不樂受。觸從其功用而建立名稱，稱為三分別。這與《對法論》中對觸的解釋相同，但與《成唯識論》不同，因為所期望的不同。然而，《對法論》的本文形式與《成唯識論》相似，解釋家似乎與此處相同。

論曰：『受用故者至非二境故。』

述曰：這是解釋受支。如文義可以理解。然而，《瑜伽師地論》第九十三卷等認為受有兩種：一是異熟受，二是境界受，如《成唯識論》所說。以上五支總別體性不相雜亂，所有疑問和結論都如《成唯識論》所說。

論曰：『引起故者至後有得起故。』

述曰：這是解釋愛支。如同水滋潤一樣。《對法論》等說它是能生支，因此建立名稱。雖然取有支也是能生，但它是從勝義的角度分別建立名稱。

【English Translation】 English version The habit of cultivation. Therefore, it is called Anli (安立, establishment). The Cheng Weishi Lun (成唯識論, Treatise on the Establishment of Consciousness-only) states that only the collective retribution karma and the collective-distinct actions are called the action branch.

Treatise says: 'Leading, therefore, to the place of birth.'

Commentary says: This explains the consciousness branch. The Yogacara school in the ninth volume of the Yogacarabhumi-sastra (瑜伽師地論, Discourse on the Stages of Yoga Practice) generally considers it to include the six consciousnesses. Volume 93 of the Yogacarabhumi-sastra and the Cheng Weishi Lun both only consider it to be the eighth consciousness (Alaya consciousness), because it is the master of the differentiated maturation. At the time of the initial birth, it can act as a guide, bringing the karmic results to the place of rebirth, therefore it is called 'leading'. The old treatise saying that it is the fundamental consciousness and the consciousness is incorrect. The master is not the other seven consciousnesses, and it is not universally and solely the consciousness, therefore it is said to be unreasonable. The Abhidharma (對法論, Discourses on Abhidharma) and others say that consciousness is the 'that which leads', and the name and form branch is the 'that which is led', because the expectations are different, so they are not contradictory.

Treatise says: 'Gathering, therefore, to the self-nature.'

Commentary says: It means that the name and form branch has the five aggregates complete, therefore it is called 'gathering'. 'Gathering' means gathering and holding the five aggregates, making them complete and perfect.

Treatise says: 'Perfection, therefore, to the complete body.'

Commentary says: This explains the six sense bases branch.

Treatise says: 'Three distinctions, therefore, to conforming to the three feelings.'

Commentary says: This explains the contact branch. It means that root, object, and consciousness are not one name, but three. This contact causes the three divisions to be different, conforming to the three feelings, sometimes it is pleasant feeling, and even neither pleasant nor painful feeling. Contact establishes its name from its function, called 'three distinctions'. This is the same as the explanation of contact in the Abhidharma, but different from the Cheng Weishi Lun, because the expectations are different. However, the text form of the Abhidharma is similar to the Cheng Weishi Lun, and the commentators seem to be the same here.

Treatise says: 'Enjoyment, therefore, to not being two objects.'

Commentary says: This explains the feeling branch. It can be understood as the text says. However, Volume 93 of the Yogacarabhumi-sastra and others consider that feeling has two types: one is the differentiated maturation feeling, and the other is the object feeling, as the Cheng Weishi Lun says. The above five branches have their total and distinct natures not mixed up, and all questions and conclusions are as the Cheng Weishi Lun says.

Treatise says: 'Causing to arise, therefore, to the arising of future existence.'

Commentary says: This explains the craving branch. It is like water nourishing. The Abhidharma and others say that it is the 'that which causes to be born' branch, therefore establishing the name. Although taking the existence branch is also 'that which causes to be born', it establishes the name separately from the ultimate meaning.

論曰。連縛故者至連縛生故。

述曰。此即取支。謂由取力令現識等緣欲我語戒見取。欲連縛未來後有之生令其不斷。取名連縛。欲我語等。是有漏因不乖當有能招後生故名為順。取令識連縛當有。對法論說有取識者有漏識也。取是漏故。諸師于彼浪作異端。皆是邪說。有取識者。皆如此知。

論曰。現前故者至得現前故。

述曰。此解有支。昔在雜行時取有後果名為取業。當果令起行名與業。由愛取力。令先已作之業取與後有上異熟果得現前故。有名現前。

論曰。苦果故者至酬前因故。

述曰。雙解二支。此是現前故名苦果。性有逼迫是苦義。酬前因故是果義。

論曰。唯此所說至令不安穩。

述曰。釋頌中第六句緣生深義。

論曰。三雜染者至謂余支。

述曰。此同瑜伽。違于對法。如唯識會。

論曰。二雜染者至謂所餘支。

述曰。此約二染以辯因果。又約異熟非異熟以辯果因故。五是因。七支是果。五十六說。識等五支是胎藏苦故立果名。約世因果。十支為因。約性果因。七支為果。諸論差別亦不相違。

論曰。七雜染者至謂生老死。

述曰。束十二支為七雜染。前十二支為十一義。今束為七。前約熏種行名攝植。后約

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：論曰：『連縛故者至連縛生故。』述曰：此即是『取』支（Upadana，十二因緣之一，指對事物的執取）。謂由『取』的力量，令現識等緣于欲、我語、戒、見取。『欲』連縛未來後有的生，令其不斷。『取』名為連縛。欲、我語等，是有漏因，不違背應當有的能招感後生的力量，故名為順。『取』令識連縛當有。《對法論》說有『取識』者，是有漏識。『取』是漏故。諸師於此妄作異端，皆是邪說。有『取識』者，皆應如此理解。論曰：『現前故者至得現前故。』述曰：此解釋『有』支（Bhava，十二因緣之一，指存在）。過去在雜行時，『取』『有』的後果名為『取業』。當果令起行，名為與業。由愛、取的力量，令先前已作之業，取與後有上的異熟果，得現前故，名為現前。論曰：『苦果故者至酬前因故。』述曰：雙重解釋『生』（Jati，十二因緣之一，指出生）和『老死』（Jara-marana，十二因緣之一，指衰老和死亡）二支。此是現前故，名為苦果。性有逼迫，是苦的含義。酬償前因，是果的含義。論曰：『唯此所說至令不安穩。』述曰：解釋頌中的第六句，說明緣起甚深的含義。論曰：『三雜染者至謂余支。』述曰：此與《瑜伽師地論》相同，違背《對法論》。如《唯識會》所說。論曰：『二雜染者至謂所餘支。』述曰：此約二種雜染，以辨別因果。又約異熟和非異熟，以辨別果因。因此，五支是因，七支是果。五十六說，識等五支是胎藏苦，故立果名。約世俗因果，十支為因。約自性因果，七支為果。諸論的差別也不相違背。論曰：『七雜染者至謂生老死。』述曰：將十二支歸納為七種雜染。前十二支為十一種含義，現在歸納為七種。前面約熏習種子，行名為攝植。後面約……

【English Translation】 English version: Treatise says: '『Linked and bound』 means up to 『linked and bound to birth』.' Commentary says: This refers to the 『grasping』 (Upadana) limb (of the twelve links of dependent origination, referring to the clinging to things). It means that by the power of 『grasping』, the present consciousness and so on are conditioned by desire, egoistic speech, precepts, views, and grasping. 『Desire』 links and binds future existence, causing it to be continuous. 『Grasping』 is called linking and binding. Desire, egoistic speech, etc., are causes with outflows (asrava), not contradicting the power to bring about future birth, so they are called favorable. 『Grasping』 causes consciousness to be linked and bound to future existence. The Abhidharma says that 『grasping consciousness』 is consciousness with outflows. 『Grasping』 is an outflow. The various teachers who fabricate different views on this are all heretical teachings. Those who speak of 『grasping consciousness』 should all understand it in this way. Treatise says: '『Present』 means up to 『obtaining the present』.' Commentary says: This explains the 『becoming』 (Bhava) limb (of the twelve links of dependent origination, referring to existence). In the past, when practicing miscellaneous actions, the consequence of 『grasping』 and 『becoming』 is called 『grasping karma』. Causing the consequence to arise is called giving karma. By the power of love and grasping, the karma already done in the past takes and gives the ripening consequence on future existence, thus obtaining the present, hence it is called present. Treatise says: '『Suffering consequence』 means up to 『recompensing previous causes』.' Commentary says: This doubly explains the 『birth』 (Jati) and 『old age and death』 (Jara-marana) limbs (of the twelve links of dependent origination, referring to birth, aging, and death). This is the present, hence it is called the suffering consequence. Its nature is oppressive, which is the meaning of suffering. Recompensing previous causes is the meaning of consequence. Treatise says: '『Only what is said here』 means up to 『causing instability』.' Commentary says: This explains the sixth line of the verse, elucidating the profound meaning of dependent origination. Treatise says: '『Three contaminations』 means up to 『referring to the remaining limbs』.' Commentary says: This is the same as the Yogacarabhumi-sastra, contradicting the Abhidharmakosa. As explained in the Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi-sastra. Treatise says: '『Two contaminations』 means up to 『referring to the remaining limbs』.' Commentary says: This uses two kinds of contamination to distinguish between cause and effect. It also uses ripened and unripened to distinguish between consequence and cause. Therefore, five limbs are the cause, and seven limbs are the consequence. Fifty-six says that the five limbs of consciousness, etc., are the suffering of the womb, hence the name consequence is established. Regarding worldly cause and effect, ten limbs are the cause. Regarding intrinsic cause and effect, seven limbs are the consequence. The differences in the various treatises do not contradict each other. Treatise says: '『Seven contaminations』 means up to 『referring to birth, old age, and death』.' Commentary says: The twelve limbs are summarized into seven contaminations. The previous twelve limbs had eleven meanings, now they are summarized into seven. The former refers to the perfuming of seeds, and action is called planting. The latter refers to...

當果行名牽引。言攝五蘊體是名色。能受用於境六處作用。合名攝受因。前約五蘊。六處生時位別名別立名。今約俱是攝受自體。皆名攝受。前約于境。于根用別觸受各別立名。今初同於境。用觸受合名受用。以觸生受受用境故。前愛約總別當用。取有約各別功能。別別立名。今並望于當果。三種皆名引起。前約有因而體逼迫。生等名為苦果。今以毀責為名。生等名為厭怖。

論曰。此諸雜染至而得生長。

述曰。三二七染教成三故名為諸染。由虛妄分別為因而得生長分別末法故。故今明之。

論曰。此前總顯至九雜染相。

述曰。釋妄分別文意有二。上來十一頌隨別解釋九門相訖。今者總結為九種相。然下空中慈氏自為初門總頌。天親后總結之。此上首尾俱無本總頌之文。唯有天親末結。以妄分別初有一部總頌故無。空性無之故有。或作者意無勞別解。

論曰。今次當說所知空性。

述曰。下十一頌明所知空性。但言所知空。即遍計所執。今言空性。顯是真如。于中有三。初許說生下。次頌曰別辯五義。后以相安立二義結前。此即初也。

論頌曰。諸相及異門至略說唯由此。

述曰。即是第二別辯五門。于中十一頌。總標五義以顯空性。下有十頌。別明五門。此

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本當結果的行為牽引著（未來），就用名稱來指代它。所說的『攝』，是指五蘊（panchaskandha）的自體，這被稱為『名色』(nāmarūpa)。能夠感受和利用外境的是六處（saḷāyatana）的作用，合起來稱為『攝受因』。前面是就五蘊、六處生起時的位置和差別而分別設立名稱。現在是說它們都是攝受的自體，都稱為『攝受』。前面是就外境，根（indriya）的作用差別，觸（sparśa）、受（vedanā）各自設立名稱。現在最初是相同于外境，用觸、受合起來稱為『受用』。因為觸生起受，受用外境的緣故。前面愛（taṇhā）是就總的、別的、當下的作用。取（upādāna）、有（bhava）是就各自的功能，分別設立名稱。現在並列希望于當來的結果，這三種都稱為『引起』。前面是就『有』（bhava）因為自體逼迫，生等稱為苦果。現在用毀壞責備作為名稱，生等稱為厭怖。

論曰：這些雜染（saṃkleśa）直到（因緣和合）而得以生長。

述曰：三二七染教（指三種、兩種、七種雜染的教義）成就三種，所以名為諸染。由於虛妄分別（vikalpa）作為因而得以生長分別末法（指虛妄分別的末法時期）。所以現在闡明它。

論曰：前面總的顯示了直到九種雜染的相。

述曰：解釋虛妄分別的文意有二。上面十一頌隨著分別解釋九門相完畢。現在總結為九種相。然而下面的空中，慈氏（Maitreya）親自作為初門總頌。天親（Vasubandhu）後來總結它。這上面首尾都沒有原本總頌的文句。只有天親最後的總結。因為虛妄分別最初有一部總頌，所以沒有。空性（śūnyatā）沒有，所以有。或者作者的意思是沒有必要另外解釋。

論曰：現在接下來應當說所知的空性。

述曰：下面十一頌闡明所知的空性。只說所知空，就是遍計所執（parikalpita）。現在說空性，顯示是真如（tathātā）。其中有三。最初允許說生下。其次頌說分別辨別五義。最後用相安立二義總結前面。這就是最初的。

論頌曰：諸相以及異門，直到略說唯由此。

述曰：這就是第二分別辨別五門。其中十一頌。總標五義來顯示空性。下面有十頌。分別闡明五門。此

【English Translation】 English version When the action of a result leads (to the future), it is designated by a name. The 'collection' (saṃgraha) that is spoken of refers to the self-nature of the five skandhas (pañcaskandha), which is called 'name and form' (nāmarūpa). The function of the six sense bases (saḷāyatana) that can experience and utilize external objects is collectively called the 'cause of collection' (saṃgraha-hetu). The former refers to the separate establishment of names based on the position and difference at the time of the arising of the five skandhas and six sense bases. Now it is said that they are all the self-nature of collection and are all called 'collection'. The former refers to the separate establishment of names based on the difference in the function of the sense organs (indriya) in relation to external objects, and the separate establishment of names for contact (sparśa) and feeling (vedanā). Now, initially, it is the same as external objects, and the combination of contact and feeling is called 'enjoyment' (bhoga). This is because contact gives rise to feeling, and feeling utilizes external objects. Previously, craving (taṇhā) was based on the general, the specific, and the present function. Grasping (upādāna) and existence (bhava) were based on their respective functions, and names were established separately. Now, hoping for the future result, all three are called 'arising'. Previously, 'existence' (bhava) was based on the compulsion of its self-nature, and birth and so on were called the result of suffering. Now, using destruction and blame as the name, birth and so on are called dread.

Treatise says: These defilements (saṃkleśa) until (conditions come together) and are able to grow.

Commentary says: The teachings on the three, two, and seven defilements (referring to the doctrines of three, two, and seven types of defilements) accomplish the three, so they are called the various defilements. Because false discrimination (vikalpa) is the cause by which the final Dharma (referring to the final period of false discrimination) is able to grow. Therefore, it is now clarified.

Treatise says: The above generally shows up to the nine aspects of defilement.

Commentary says: There are two meanings in explaining the text on false discrimination. The eleven verses above explain the nine aspects separately. Now, they are summarized into nine aspects. However, in the space below, Maitreya (Maitreya) personally summarizes the initial aspect. Vasubandhu (Vasubandhu) summarizes it later. The beginning and end above do not have the original text of the general summary. Only Vasubandhu's final summary. Because there was an initial general summary of false discrimination, there is none. Emptiness (śūnyatā) does not have it, so it exists. Or the author's intention is that there is no need for separate explanation.

Treatise says: Now, next, one should speak of the known emptiness.

Commentary says: The eleven verses below clarify the known emptiness. Just saying known emptiness is the completely conceptualized (parikalpita). Now saying emptiness shows that it is Suchness (tathātā). There are three aspects in it. Initially, permission is given to speak of arising below. Secondly, the verse says to separately distinguish the five meanings. Finally, the two meanings of establishing the aspect are used to summarize the previous. This is the initial one.

Verse says: The various aspects and different gates, until briefly speaking, are only due to this.

Commentary says: This is the second separate distinction of the five gates. There are eleven verses in it. The five meanings are generally marked to show emptiness. There are ten verses below. The five gates are explained separately. This

頌即初總標五義。于中有二。上二句列五門名。下二句顯其空性決定唯由此中五義以辯相也。舊論言體相。此中但言相。舊云分別。此言差別。餘名皆同。然以九義辯妄分別相是品故皆有相言。此五義中。唯初有相。餘四則無。理亦應有顯妄分別別行相轉。此唯一相故作法殊。

論曰。應知所取至此相等五。

述曰。此即總釋頌之大綱。二取之空即以為門。所顯之性乃真如理。略分別者。唯由此中相等五義。以但解唯。由者即第三囀也。

論曰。所知空性其相云何。

述曰。下別辯也。初之一頌辯空之相。次有一頌辯空異門。次有一頌辯異門義。次有五頌辯空差別。後有二頌辯空成立。此即第一辯空諸相。于中有二。初假徴起頌。后舉頌正釋。此所牒文即是初也。

論頌曰。無二有無故至是說為空相。

述曰。上三句明空諸相。下一句總結空相。上三句中。初一句遮無顯有。次二句明非定有無或異或一。

論曰。無二謂無至二取之無。

述曰。無二者除如所執。遮無也。有無者。有二空性。顯于有也。若準安慧釋。二取二分皆計所執。若依護法釋。依二分二取起。二所執故名無也。下所有文與此同者。皆準此釋。

論曰。此即顯空至非有非無。

述曰

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：頌文首先總括標明五種意義。其中包含兩層含義。前面的兩句列出五種法門的名目，後面的兩句顯示其空性，確定唯有通過這五種意義才能辨別諸法的表相。舊論中說的是『體』和『相』，這裡只說『相』。舊論中說的是『分別』，這裡說的是『差別』，其餘的名目都相同。然而，因為用九種意義來辨別虛妄分別的表相，所以這一品都帶有『相』字。在這五種意義中，只有第一個有『相』，其餘四個則沒有。理應也有顯現虛妄分別的別行相轉，這裡只有一個『相』，所以做法不同。

論曰：應當瞭解所取到此相等五種意義。

述曰：這便是總的解釋頌文的大綱。將能取和所取的空性作為法門，所顯現的自性便是真如之理。簡略地分別，唯有通過此處的『相等』五種意義，因為只是解釋『唯』。『由』字就是第三囀聲。

論曰：所知的空性，它的表相是怎樣的呢？

述曰：下面分別辨析。第一首頌文辨析空之相，第二首頌文辨析空的不同法門，第三首頌文辨析不同法門的意義，第四到第八首頌文辨析空的差別，最後兩首頌文辨析空的成立。這裡是第一部分，辨析空的各種表相。其中包含兩層含義，首先假設提問，然後舉出頌文正式解釋。這裡所引用的文字就是第一部分。

論頌曰：無二有無故，乃至是說為空相。

述曰：上面的三句說明空的各種表相，下面一句總結空的表相。上面的三句中，第一句遮止『無』，顯示『有』，接下來的兩句說明並非絕對的『有』或『無』，或者『異』或者『一』。

論曰：『無二』是指沒有如所執著的。

述曰：『無二』是指去除如所執著的，遮止『無』。『有無』是指有二取（dvi-grāhaka）的空性，顯示『有』。如果按照安慧（Sthiramati）的解釋，能取和所取二分都計為所執著的。如果按照護法（Dharmapāla）的解釋，依賴二分和二取而生起二種所執著，所以稱為『無』。下面所有與此相同的地方，都按照這個解釋。

【English Translation】 English version: The verse initially summarizes and marks five meanings. Within this, there are two layers of meaning. The first two lines list the names of the five gates (pañca-dvāra), and the last two lines reveal their emptiness (śūnyatā), determining that only through these five meanings can the appearances (lakṣaṇa) of phenomena be distinguished. The old treatise speaks of 'essence' (tattva) and 'appearance' (lakṣaṇa), but here only 'appearance' is mentioned. The old treatise speaks of 'discrimination' (vikalpa), while this speaks of 'difference' (viśeṣa); the remaining names are the same. However, because the appearances of false discrimination (abhūta-parikalpa) are distinguished using nine meanings, this chapter all contains the word 'appearance'. Among these five meanings, only the first has 'appearance'; the remaining four do not. There should also be a separate mode of operation (vṛtti) that manifests the appearance of false discrimination, but here there is only one 'appearance', so the method is different.

Treatise says: It should be understood that the apprehended (grāhya) up to these appearances are the five.

Commentary says: This is a general explanation of the outline of the verse. Taking the emptiness of the two apprehensions (dvaya-grāha) as the gate, the nature revealed is the principle of Suchness (tathatā). Briefly distinguishing, only through the five meanings such as 'appearance', because it only explains 'only'. The word 'by' is the third case ending (tṛtīyā vibhakti).

Treatise says: The emptiness of what is known (jñeya-śūnyatā), what is its appearance?

Commentary says: The following separately analyzes. The first verse analyzes the appearance of emptiness, the second verse analyzes the different gates of emptiness, the third verse analyzes the meaning of the different gates, the fourth to eighth verses analyze the differences of emptiness, and the last two verses analyze the establishment of emptiness. This is the first part, analyzing the various appearances of emptiness. Within this, there are two layers of meaning: first, a hypothetical question is raised, and then the verse is cited for formal explanation. The text cited here is the first part.

Verse says: Because there is no duality, existence, or non-existence, it is said to be the appearance of emptiness.

Commentary says: The above three lines explain the various appearances of emptiness, and the line below summarizes the appearance of emptiness. In the above three lines, the first line negates 'non-existence' and reveals 'existence'. The following two lines explain that it is not absolute 'existence' or 'non-existence', or 'different' or 'one'.

Treatise says: 'No duality' means there is no such thing as what is clung to.

Commentary says: 'No duality' means removing what is clung to, negating 'non-existence'. 'Existence and non-existence' refers to the emptiness of the two apprehensions (dvi-grāhaka), revealing 'existence'. If according to Sthiramati's explanation, the two divisions of the apprehended and the apprehender are all considered to be what is clung to. If according to Dharmapāla's explanation, the two kinds of clinging arise depending on the two divisions and the two apprehensions, so it is called 'non-existence'. All the following passages that are the same as this one should be interpreted according to this explanation.

。此釋于上有二之無。謂即以後無性為性。非一向性無並顯于空是非無有二。起下論。

論。云何非有。

述曰。此徴無也。

論曰。無二有故。

述曰。此答非有。能所二取名為二有。無此二有故說為無。

論。云何非無。

述曰。此問有也。

論曰。有二無故。

述曰。二無者即二無我理。有此二理故說非無。于俗諦中。不同依他定有。亦異所執常無。

論曰。此顯空性非有非無。

述曰。結第二句頌。

論曰。此空與彼至非異非一。

述曰。謂有問言。空是法性。與其法為一異。為答此問。此立宗。

論曰。若異應成至如苦等性。

述曰。顯非異因也。謂五蘊等名法。真如是彼法之性故名非異也。如苦無常空無我等。此小乘等說與法非異。故以為喻。謂立宗言。真如與蘊等非定異。因云。法之性故。喻云。如苦等性。

論曰。若一則應至亦非共相。

述曰。顯非一因。謂五蘊等與此真如定非是一。一有何過。真如應非無漏無分別智境。即五蘊故。如五蘊等。又此真如應非總之共相。即五蘊故。如色受等。有二比量。如此應知。然入真觀。一一物如。皆須了達。即觀自相。言共相者。從加行說。唯識亦有。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：這段解釋說明了上面所說的『二之無』，意思是說，以最終的無自性作為自性。並非一味地說空，而是同時顯現空既不是『有』也不是『無』這兩種極端。以下開始論述。

論：什麼叫做『非有』？

述曰：這是提問『無』。

論曰：因為沒有『二有』的緣故。

述曰：這是回答『非有』。能取和所取這兩種執取，合稱為『二有』。因為沒有這兩種執取，所以說是『無』。

論：什麼叫做『非無』？

述曰：這是提問『有』。

論曰：因為有『二無』的緣故。

述曰：『二無』指的是兩種無我之理（人無我，法無我）。因為有這兩種道理，所以說『非無』。在世俗諦中，它不同於依他起性（Paratantra）（指因緣和合而生的事物）的實有，也不同於遍計所執性（Parikalpita）（指虛妄分別所執的事物）的常無。

論曰：這段話表明空性既不是『有』也不是『無』。

述曰：總結第二句偈頌。

論曰：這個空性與那個法性，既不是相異的，也不是相同的。

述曰：有人提問說，空是法性（Dharmata），那麼它與法（Dharma）之間是相同還是相異？爲了回答這個問題，這裡立宗。

論曰：如果相異，就應該成為像苦性（Dukkha）等等那樣的性質。

述曰：顯示不是相異的原因。五蘊（Skandha）等稱為法，真如（Tathata）是那些法的本性，所以說不是相異的。就像苦、無常、空、無我等等，這些小乘佛教所說的與法不是相異的，所以用它們來作比喻。也就是說，立宗說，真如與五蘊等不是絕對相異的，原因是『法的本性』。比喻是，就像苦性等等。

論曰：如果相同，就應該不是無漏（Anasrava）、無分別智（Nirvikalpa-jnana）的境界，也不是總體的共相（Samanya-lakshana）。

述曰：顯示不是相同的原因。五蘊等與這個真如絕對不是相同的。如果相同會有什麼過失呢？真如就不應該是無漏、無分別智的境界，因為它就是五蘊。就像五蘊等。而且，這個真如也不應該是總體的共相，因為它就是五蘊。就像色、受等。這裡有兩個比量。應該這樣理解。然而，進入真如的觀照時，每一個事物都如實顯現，都需要徹底瞭解，也就是觀照自相（Svalaksana）。說『共相』是從加行位（Prayoga-marga）來說的，唯識宗也有這種說法。

【English Translation】 English version: This explanation clarifies the 'absence of two' mentioned above, meaning that ultimate absence of inherent existence is taken as the nature. It doesn't simply assert emptiness, but simultaneously reveals that emptiness is neither 'existent' nor 'non-existent' extremes. The following begins the discussion.

Treatise: What is meant by 'not existent'?

Commentary: This is a question about 'non-existence'.

Treatise: Because there is no 'duality of existence'.

Commentary: This is the answer to 'not existent'. The grasping subject and the grasped object are collectively called 'duality of existence'. Because there is no such duality, it is said to be 'non-existent'.

Treatise: What is meant by 'not non-existent'?

Commentary: This is a question about 'existence'.

Treatise: Because there is 'duality of non-existence'.

Commentary: 'Duality of non-existence' refers to the two principles of no-self (absence of self of person, absence of self of phenomena). Because there are these two principles, it is said to be 'not non-existent'. In conventional truth (Samvriti-satya), it is different from the real existence of dependent origination (Paratantra) (things arising from the aggregation of causes and conditions), and also different from the permanent non-existence of the completely imputed nature (Parikalpita) (things falsely conceived by discrimination).

Treatise: This shows that the nature of emptiness is neither 'existent' nor 'non-existent'.

Commentary: This concludes the second line of the verse.

Treatise: This emptiness and that suchness (Dharmata) are neither different nor the same.

Commentary: Someone asks, 'Emptiness is the nature of phenomena (Dharma), so is it the same as or different from phenomena (Dharma)?' To answer this question, this establishes the thesis.

Treatise: If different, it should become a nature like suffering (Dukkha), etc.

Commentary: Showing the reason for not being different. The five aggregates (Skandha), etc., are called phenomena, and suchness (Tathata) is the nature of those phenomena, so it is said to be not different. Like suffering, impermanence, emptiness, no-self, etc., these are said by the Hinayana schools to be not different from phenomena, so they are used as metaphors. That is, the thesis is established, saying that suchness is not absolutely different from the five aggregates, etc., because it is 'the nature of phenomena'. The metaphor is like the nature of suffering, etc.

Treatise: If the same, it should not be the object of undefiled (Anasrava), non-discriminating wisdom (Nirvikalpa-jnana), nor the general characteristic (Samanya-lakshana) of the whole.

Commentary: Showing the reason for not being the same. The five aggregates, etc., are absolutely not the same as this suchness. What fault would there be if they were the same? Suchness should not be the object of undefiled, non-discriminating wisdom, because it is the five aggregates. Like the five aggregates, etc. Moreover, this suchness should not be the general characteristic of the whole, because it is the five aggregates. Like form, feeling, etc. There are two inferences here. It should be understood in this way. However, when entering the contemplation of suchness, each and every thing appears as it is, and needs to be thoroughly understood, that is, contemplating the self-characteristic (Svalaksana). Saying 'general characteristic' is from the stage of application (Prayoga-marga), and the Consciousness-only school also has this view.

應如彼說。

論曰。此即顯空至離一異相。

述曰。結頌第三句也。其頌第四句上三句一一通用。如文可知。

論曰。所知空性異門云何。

述曰。此問第二門也。

論頌曰。略說空異門至法界等應知。

述曰。舊論曰眾名。今顯梵本但言異門故。又此真如不可說體。約假名辯故。此但應言異門。以前頌明不得體故。上一句立宗。次二句第四句三字列名。下二字勸知。法界等者。舊論云法身等。然本無法身言。譯家增語。然對法第二有七名此中有五。出彼無我性空性。般若經說有十二名。出彼九名。謂法性。不虛妄性。不變異性。平等性。離生性。法定。法住。虛空界。不思識界。合真如有十六名。此中五名。對法所出二名。般若所出九名。今言等者。等取十一。以頌自言是略說故。

論曰。略說空性至此異門義。

述曰。釋頌大綱。寄徴起頌。

論頌曰。由無變無倒至異門義如次。

述曰。釋前異門所詮義也。第一句中。由字通下五義。是第三囀。替故字第五囀。但由無變說為真如。等一一應通上三句烈名。下一句次屬。

論曰。即此中說至無轉易故。

述曰。釋真如義名。此中說所知空性。通下四義皆應說之。真者不虛妄。如者常義

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：應如彼說。

論曰：這即是顯示空性達到遠離一異之相。

述曰：這是總結偈頌的第三句。其偈頌的第四句與前面三句一一通用，如文中所知。

論曰：所知的空性的不同名稱是什麼？

述曰：這是提問第二個問題。

論頌曰：簡略地說，空性的不同名稱，乃至法界等，應當知曉。

述曰：舊論中說的是『眾名』，現在顯現梵文字只說是『異門』。而且這真如不可說其本體，只是用假名來辨別，所以這裡只應說是『異門』，因為前面的偈頌說明沒有得到本體。上一句是立宗，接著兩句和第四句的前三個字是列出名稱，下面的兩個字是勸人知曉。『法界等』，舊論中說是『法身等』，然而原本沒有『法身』這個詞，是譯者增加的。然而在《對法》第二中有七個名稱，這裡有五個，去掉了其中的『無我性』和『空性』。《般若經》中說有十二個名稱，去掉了其中的九個，即『法性』、『不虛妄性』、『不變異性』、『平等性』、『離生性』、『法定』、『法住』、『虛空界』、『不思識界』。合起來真如有十六個名稱，這裡有五個，《對法》中出現的兩個，《般若》中出現的九個。現在說『等』，是等取十一個，因為偈頌自己說是簡略地說。

論曰：簡略地說空性，乃至這些不同名稱的意義。

述曰：解釋偈頌的大綱，藉由提問來引出偈頌。

論頌曰：由於無變、無倒，乃至不同名稱的意義依次是。

述曰：解釋前面不同名稱所詮釋的意義。第一句中，『由』字貫通下面的五個意義，是第三囀（工具格），代替『故』字，是第五囀（離格）。只是由於無變，才說為真如。等等，一一應貫通上面的三句列出名稱。下一句依次對應。

論曰：即在此中說，乃至沒有轉變。

述曰：解釋『真如』這個名稱的意義。這裡所說的所知空性，貫通下面的四個意義都應該說它。『真』是不虛妄，『如』是常的意思。

【English Translation】 English version: It should be said as such.

Treatise says: This is to reveal that emptiness reaches the state of being apart from the aspects of one and different (ekatva-nanatva).

Commentary says: This concludes the third line of the verse. The fourth line of the verse is universally applicable to each of the preceding three lines, as can be understood from the text.

Treatise says: What are the different terms for the emptiness of what is knowable (jneya-sunyata)?

Commentary says: This asks the second question.

Verse says: Briefly speaking, the different terms for emptiness, up to the realm of reality (dharmadhatu) and so forth, should be known.

Commentary says: The old treatise said 'many names.' Now it is clear that the Sanskrit text only says 'different terms.' Moreover, this Suchness (tathata) cannot be spoken of in terms of its essence; it is only distinguished by means of provisional names. Therefore, it should only be referred to as 'different terms,' because the preceding verse explained that the essence is not attained. The first line establishes the thesis. The next two lines and the first three words of the fourth line list the names. The last two words encourage understanding. 'Realm of reality (dharmadhatu) and so forth': the old treatise said 'Dharma Body (dharmakaya) and so forth,' but originally there was no mention of 'Dharma Body (dharmakaya)'; it was an addition by the translator. However, in the second chapter of the Abhidharmasamuccaya, there are seven names, and here there are five, omitting 'selflessness (nairatmya)' and 'emptiness (sunyata)'. The Prajnaparamita Sutra says there are twelve names, omitting nine of them, namely 'Dharma-nature (dharmanata)', 'non-falsity (avitathata)', 'non-alteration (avikaratva)', 'equality (samatva)', 'freedom from arising (anutpattita)', 'Dharma-established (dharma-sthita)', 'Dharma-abiding (dharma-sthiti)', 'space-realm (akasa-dhatu)', 'unthinkable realm (acintya-dhatu)'. Altogether, there are sixteen names for Suchness (tathata). Here there are five names, two appearing in the Abhidharmasamuccaya, and nine appearing in the Prajnaparamita. Now, when it says 'and so forth,' it includes eleven, because the verse itself says it is a brief summary.

Treatise says: Briefly speaking about the emptiness, up to the meaning of these different terms.

Commentary says: Explains the outline of the verse, using the question to introduce the verse.

Verse says: Because of no change (avikara), no reversal (aviparyasa), up to the meanings of the different terms in order.

Commentary says: Explains the meaning expressed by the preceding different terms. In the first line, the word 'because of (yena)' connects to the following five meanings. It is the third case (instrumental case). Replacing the word 'therefore (tasmat)', it is the fifth case (ablative case). Only because of no change (avikara) is it said to be Suchness (tathata). And so on, each should connect to the above three lines listing the names. The next line corresponds in order.

Treatise says: That is to say, in this it is said, up to without transformation (avikara).

Commentary says: Explains the meaning of the name 'Suchness (tathata)'. What is said here as the emptiness of what is knowable (jneya-sunyata) should be said to connect to the following four meanings. 'Such (tatha)' means non-false, 'ness (ta)' means constant.

。如唯識說。

論曰。由無倒義至依緣事故。

述曰。釋實際名義。由此真如非四七等倒所依所緣之事故。名實際。舊論云。非種類及境故。此言依即彼種類。

論曰。由相滅義至一切相故。

述曰。釋無相名義。諸相。謂十相佛地論等說。謂色聲香味觸生異滅女相。離此相名故立無相名。

論曰。由聖智境義至所行義故。

述曰。唯識第八及此下說。勝義有三。一義勝義。謂真如。依主釋。此所說是。二得勝義。謂涅槃。持業釋。三行勝義。謂勝道。有財釋。以勝為義故。

論曰。由聖法因義。

述曰。法是如果。謂諸聖法此是彼因故名法界。界是何義。即是因義。

論曰。無我等義如理應知。

述曰。解頌等字。舊論眾名雖有等字。義中不釋。此即釋之。如對法等解餘名也。

論。云何應知空性差別。

述曰。將解第四差別之門。寄問起也。

論頌曰。此雜染清凈至凈故許為凈。

述曰。成差別中有五頌。初一頌染凈差別。次四頌所知差別。此即初也。第一句正解差別。第二句釋差別因。第三句顯差別喻。第四句結成凈義。由此真如自性凈故名為客染義。許凈簡不極成隨一過等。

論曰。空性差別至二清凈。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：如唯識宗所說。

論曰：由於沒有顛倒的意義，乃至作為所依賴的緣故。

述曰：解釋『實際』（Satya）的名稱和含義。由於真如（Tathata）不是四種顛倒或七種顛倒等所依賴或攀緣的對象，所以稱為『實際』。舊論中說：『不是種類和境界』。這裡說的『依』就是指那些種類。

論曰：由於諸相寂滅的意義，乃至一切相都寂滅的緣故。

述曰：解釋『無相』（Animitta）的名稱和含義。諸相，指《佛地經論》等所說的十種相，即色、聲、香、味、觸、生、異、滅、男女相。遠離這些相的名稱，所以立名為『無相』。

論曰：由於聖智境界的意義，乃至聖智所行之處的緣故。

述曰：唯識宗在第八識以及下文說到，勝義（Paramartha）有三種：一是義勝義，指真如，屬於依主釋；這裡所說就是指這個。二是得勝義，指涅槃（Nirvana），屬於持業釋。三是行勝義，指殊勝之道，屬於有財釋。因為殊勝是其意義。

論曰：由於聖法之因的意義。

述曰：法是如果，指諸聖法，真如是聖法之因，所以名為法界（Dharmadhatu）。界是什麼意義？就是因的意義。

論曰：無我（Anatta）等意義，應該如理如實地瞭解。

述曰：解釋頌文中的『等』字。舊論中，雖然眾名有『等』字，但在意義中沒有解釋。這裡就解釋它。如同《對法論》等解釋其他名稱一樣。

論：應該如何瞭解空性（Sunyata）的差別？

述曰：將要解釋第四種差別之門，通過提問來引發。

論頌曰：此雜染清凈，乃至因為清凈，所以許為清凈。

述曰：成就差別中有五頌。第一頌是染凈的差別，接下來的四頌是所知的差別。這裡是第一頌。第一句是正式解釋差別，第二句是解釋差別的因，第三句是顯示差別的比喻，第四句是總結成就清凈的意義。由於真如自性清凈，所以名為客塵所染的意義。許為清凈，是爲了避免不極成、隨一過等過失。

論曰：空性的差別，乃至二種清凈。

【English Translation】 English version: As the Vijnanavada (Consciousness-only school) says.

Treatise says: Because of the meaning of non-reversal, up to being the condition relied upon.

Commentary says: Explaining the name and meaning of 'Actuality' (Satya). Because Suchness (Tathata) is not the object relied upon or clung to by the four inversions or the seven inversions, etc., it is called 'Actuality'. The old treatise says: 'Not a category or an object.' The 'relying upon' mentioned here refers to those categories.

Treatise says: Because of the meaning of the cessation of characteristics, up to all characteristics ceasing.

Commentary says: Explaining the name and meaning of 'Absence of Characteristics' (Animitta). The characteristics refer to the ten characteristics mentioned in treatises such as the Buddhabhumi Sutra Shastra, namely form, sound, smell, taste, touch, birth, difference, cessation, male, and female characteristics. Because of being apart from these characteristics, it is named 'Absence of Characteristics'.

Treatise says: Because of the meaning of the realm of holy wisdom, up to the place where holy wisdom operates.

Commentary says: The Vijnanavada school, in the eighth consciousness and in the following text, says that Ultimate Truth (Paramartha) has three types: first, the Ultimate Truth of meaning, referring to Suchness, which belongs to the dependent possessive compound; what is being discussed here refers to this. Second, the Ultimate Truth of attainment, referring to Nirvana, which belongs to the determinative compound. Third, the Ultimate Truth of practice, referring to the supreme path, which belongs to the possessive compound. Because supremacy is its meaning.

Treatise says: Because of the meaning of the cause of holy Dharma.

Commentary says: Dharma is the result, referring to all holy Dharmas; Suchness is the cause of holy Dharmas, so it is named Dharmadhatu (Dharmadhatu). What is the meaning of 'Dhatu'? It is the meaning of 'cause'.

Treatise says: The meaning of selflessness (Anatta), etc., should be understood as it truly is.

Commentary says: Explaining the word 'etc.' in the verse. In the old treatise, although there is the word 'etc.' in the many names, it is not explained in the meaning. Here it is explained. Just like the Abhidharma and others explain other names.

Treatise: How should one understand the differences in emptiness (Sunyata)?

Commentary says: About to explain the fourth door of differences, using a question to initiate it.

Treatise verse says: This is mixed with defilement and purity, up to because of purity, it is allowed to be pure.

Commentary says: There are five verses to accomplish the differences. The first verse is the difference between defilement and purity, and the following four verses are the differences in what is known. This is the first verse. The first line is the formal explanation of the difference, the second line is the explanation of the cause of the difference, the third line is to show the metaphor of the difference, and the fourth line is to conclude the meaning of accomplishing purity. Because Suchness is pure in its own nature, it is named the meaning of being defiled by adventitious dust. Allowing it to be pure is to avoid faults such as non-establishment and singleness.

Treatise says: The difference of emptiness, up to two kinds of purity.

述曰。釋第一句頌立差別宗。

論曰。此成染凈至說為清凈。

述曰。釋第二句成差別因。

論曰。雖先雜染至成無常失。

述曰。釋外伏難。顯性是常。生起水等第三句喻也。謂有難言。如若先染后成凈者何不無常。今答不然。無無常失。

論曰。如水界等出離客塵。

述曰。此釋不成無常過失。為初宗因之同法喻。如水界有塵。如金有垢。如太虛空有云。皆是客塵。非性成染。後去塵已非性成凈。名為無常。又水界等雖暫有垢。非體不凈。為先宗因之同法喻。

論曰。空凈亦然非性轉變。

述曰。此舉法合謂立宗言。所知空性可成染凈差別。有垢故。頌中由字即是因。諸有垢無垢者。皆可成於染凈差別。如水界金。空性性非染。暫有客塵故。如金空。又空性非無常。以性凈故。如空等。此中三比量有寬狡。然水界者水大。然水及金皆體無常。非性無垢。今取少分為喻故無過失。

論曰。此空差別至無性自性空。

述曰。自下明約所治差別。空成十六。將釋下文。先烈能治。然此與顯揚第十五十六空同。般若初會有二十空。加此散空自相空共相空不可得空自性空。自中無散空即彼無變異空。以諸善根盡未來際相續無斷名無變異。名異義同。然復

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：述曰：解釋第一句頌詞，確立差別宗（建立事物之間差異性的宗派）。

論曰：此句成就了染凈（被污染和清凈）的差別，說明了清凈的道理。

述曰：解釋第二句，成就差別的原因。

論曰：雖然先前是雜染的，但最終成就清凈，不會造成無常的過失。

述曰：解釋外道的詰難，彰顯自性是常。生起水等是第三句的比喻。有人提出疑問，如果先前被污染後來才變得清凈，為什麼不是無常的呢？現在回答說不是這樣的，沒有無常的過失。

論曰：比如水界（水的本性）等，出離了客塵（外來的塵埃）。

述曰：這是解釋不成無常的過失，作為最初宗因的同法比喻。比如水界有塵埃，比如金子有污垢，比如太虛空有云彩，這些都是客塵，不是自性形成的污染。後來去除塵埃后，也不是自性形成的清凈，所以不稱為無常。又比如水界等雖然暫時有污垢，但本體不是不乾淨的，作為先前宗因的同法比喻。

論曰：空性清凈也是這樣，不是自性的轉變。

述曰：這是舉例說明，確立宗義。所知的空性可以成就染凈的差別，因為有垢染的緣故。頌中的『由』字就是原因。凡是有垢染或沒有垢染的事物，都可以成就染凈的差別，比如水界和金子。空性的自性不是染污的，只是暫時有客塵的緣故，比如金子和虛空。而且空性不是無常的，因為自性清凈的緣故，比如虛空等。這其中三個比量有寬泛和狡辯之處。然而水界指的是水大（地水火風空中的水元素），水和金的本體都是無常的，不是自性沒有垢染。現在取少部分作為比喻，所以沒有過失。

論曰：此空性的差別，乃至無自性自性空（沒有自性的自性本空）。

述曰：下面說明依據所要對治的差別。空性成就十六種。將要解釋下文。先列出能對治的法。然而這與《顯揚聖教論》第十五和第十六空相同。《般若經》初會有二十空，加上此處的散空、自相空、共相空、不可得空、自性空。自性空中的無散空就是彼處的無變異空。因為諸善根盡未來際相續不斷，名為無變異，名稱不同意義相同。然而又

【English Translation】 English version: Commentary: This explains the first verse, establishing the doctrine of difference (establishing the school that differentiates between things).

Treatise: This verse accomplishes the difference between defilement and purity (being defiled and being pure), explaining the principle of purity.

Commentary: This explains the second verse, accomplishing the cause of difference.

Treatise: Although initially mixed with defilement, it ultimately achieves purity, without incurring the fault of impermanence.

Commentary: This explains the refutation of external objections, revealing that inherent nature is constant. The arising of water, etc., is a metaphor in the third verse. Someone raises the question: if it is initially defiled and later becomes pure, why is it not impermanent? Now the answer is that it is not so; there is no fault of impermanence.

Treatise: For example, the water element (the nature of water) is free from adventitious dust (external dust).

Commentary: This explains the non-establishment of the fault of impermanence, serving as a similar example for the initial reason of the doctrine. For example, the water element has dust, gold has impurities, and the vast sky has clouds. These are all adventitious dust, not defilement formed by inherent nature. Later, after removing the dust, it is not purity formed by inherent nature, so it is not called impermanent. Furthermore, although the water element, etc., temporarily has impurities, its essence is not impure, serving as a similar example for the previous reason of the doctrine.

Treatise: Emptiness and purity are also like this; it is not a transformation of inherent nature.

Commentary: This is an example to illustrate and establish the doctrine. The knowable emptiness can accomplish the difference between defilement and purity because it has defilement. The word 'by' in the verse is the cause. All things that have defilement or do not have defilement can accomplish the difference between defilement and purity, like the water element and gold. The inherent nature of emptiness is not defiled; it is only temporarily subject to adventitious dust, like gold and space. Moreover, emptiness is not impermanent because its inherent nature is pure, like space, etc. These three analogies have broad and sophistical aspects. However, the water element refers to the water element (the water element in earth, water, fire, wind, and space). The essence of water and gold is impermanent, not inherently without defilement. Now, taking a small part as a metaphor, there is no fault.

Treatise: This difference of emptiness, up to the emptiness of self-nature without self-nature (the inherent emptiness of no inherent nature).

Commentary: Below, it explains based on the difference of what is to be treated. Emptiness accomplishes sixteen types. It will explain the following text. First, list the dharmas that can treat. However, this is the same as the fifteenth and sixteenth emptinesses in the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra. The initial assembly of the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra has twenty emptinesses, plus the scattered emptiness, self-characteristic emptiness, common-characteristic emptiness, unobtainable emptiness, and self-nature emptiness here. The non-scattered emptiness in self-nature emptiness is the non-transformation emptiness there. Because all good roots continue uninterruptedly into the future, it is called non-transformation; the names are different, but the meanings are the same. However, again

此論別加相空。七十七說十七空。謂一切法空。相空。無際空。內空。無所得空。外空內外空。本性空。大空。有為空。畢竟空。無性空。無性自性空。勝義空。無為空。無變異空。空空。加此無所得一個空。然第二會大般若說十八空加此。第三會說十六空。然與瑜伽所治稍別。所以者何。

論曰。此等略義云何應知。

述曰。上來第一烈空。自下第二別釋空義。此中有十六空。等余經論所有故說等字。大般若經第一會說二十空。謂內空。外空。內外空。空空。大空。勝義空。有為空。無為空。畢竟空。無際空。散空。無變異空。本性空。自相空。共相空。一切法空。不可得空。無性空。自性空。無性自性空。第二會明十八空。謂內空。外空。內外空。空空。大空。勝義空。有為空。無為空。畢竟空。無際空。散無散空。本性空。自共相空。一切法空。不可得空。無性空。自性空。無性自性空。第三分中第一卷明十九空。此十六空上加所緣空增上空樂無空等。第三分中第十卷當四百八十八明十六空。名與此同。佛自廣解。與此稍異。應勘會之。亦應勘第一第二會此相當處。此中諸文離合有異。義亦不增。釋中有四頌分為二段。初三頌明十四空。后一頌明二空。二空。是前十四空性空。前約能詮設故十四。

后約空性明以有二。七十七說亦與此同。

論頌曰。能食及所食至故菩薩觀空。

述曰。初一頌明八空中。一頌明三空。后一頌明三空。故成十四。然第一頌末有一空字貫通八處。第二第三俱第四句各結上三空。皆準此釋。

論曰。能食空者至即是外空。

述曰。先牒文而後申義。此二空約處為論。縱在身之內外。隨處而說立二空也。能食者受用義。所食翻此。

論曰。此依身者至名內外空。

述曰。此亦牒文后申義也。前二空約別六處。今此空約總一身。集前二法以成身故。

論曰。諸器世間說為所住至名為大空。

述曰。唯約外器。即在四處。先申義而後牒文也。上來四空皆真知境。次有一空空能觀心。

論曰。能見此者至說名空空。

述曰。此內處等四空是所見。見此空智名能見。能見空之智亦空故說為空空。而智緣空起。但說為空。此智亦空故名空空。此上五空皆依主釋。內身之空乃至空之空故名為空空。與瑜伽同。

論曰。如理者至名勝義空。

述曰。如理之體即是勝義。勝義即是法性真如。勝之義故。今言如者。義當於勝。稱理知故名如實行。行者有為。簡無為法名如實故。又言理者。義當於義。是如實行所觀境故。此如理

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：後面對空性的闡明與有二種方式相關。七十七種說法也與此相同。

論頌說：能食者和所食者，因此菩薩觀察空性。

述記說：最初一頌闡明八空，一頌闡明三空，后一頌闡明三空，因此總共十四空。然而，第一頌末尾有一個『空』字貫穿八處。第二和第三頌的第四句都總結了前面的三空，都應按照這個原則來解釋。

論說：能食空，即是外空。

述記說：先引用原文，然後闡述意義。這兩種空是就處所而言的。即使在身體的內外，也隨處而說，建立這兩種空。『能食者』是受用的意思，『所食』與此相反。

論說：此依身者，名為內外空。

述記說：這也是先引用原文，然後闡述意義。前面的兩種空是就各個六處而言的，現在的這種空是就整個身體而言的，集合了前面的兩種法而形成身體。

論說：諸器世間，說為所住，名為大空。

述記說：僅僅就外在的器世間而言，即在四個處所。先闡述意義，然後引用原文。以上四空都是真智的境界。接下來有一種空，是空掉能觀的心。

論說：能見此者，說名空空。

述記說：前面的內處等四空是所見。見到此空的智慧名為能見。能見空的智慧也是空性的，所以說為空空。而智慧緣于空性而生起，但說是空。此智慧也是空性的，所以名為空空。以上五空都是依主釋。內身之空乃至空之空，所以名為空空，與《瑜伽師地論》相同。

論說：如理者，名勝義空。

述記說：如理的本體就是勝義（Paramārtha，最終的真實）。勝義就是法性真如（Tathātā，如實）。因為是殊勝的意義。現在說『如』，意義相當於『勝』，因為是符合真理的認知，所以名為如實行。『行』是有為法，區別于無為法，所以名為如實。又說『理』，意義相當於『義』，是如實行所觀察的境界。此如理

【English Translation】 English version: The subsequent explanations of emptiness are related to two approaches. The seventy-seven statements are also in accordance with this.

The treatise verse says: 'The eater and the eaten, therefore the Bodhisattva observes emptiness.'

The commentary says: 'The first verse explains the eight emptinesses, one verse explains the three emptinesses, and the last verse explains the three emptinesses, thus forming fourteen emptinesses in total. However, at the end of the first verse, there is the word 'emptiness' that runs through all eight places. The fourth lines of the second and third verses all summarize the preceding three emptinesses, and all should be interpreted according to this principle.'

The treatise says: 'The emptiness of the eater is external emptiness.'

The commentary says: 'First quoting the text, and then explaining the meaning. These two emptinesses are discussed in terms of location. Even within or outside the body, they are spoken of according to the location, establishing these two emptinesses. 'The eater' means to enjoy, 'the eaten' is the opposite of this.'

The treatise says: 'This which relies on the body is called internal-external emptiness.'

The commentary says: 'This is also first quoting the text, and then explaining the meaning. The previous two emptinesses are in terms of the individual six places, and this emptiness now is in terms of the entire body, gathering the previous two dharmas to form the body.'

The treatise says: 'The world of vessels is said to be the dwelling place, called great emptiness.'

The commentary says: 'Only in terms of the external world of vessels, which is in the four places. First explaining the meaning, and then quoting the text. The above four emptinesses are all the realm of true knowledge. Next, there is an emptiness that empties the observing mind.'

The treatise says: 'One who sees this is said to be the emptiness of emptiness.'

The commentary says: 'The previous four emptinesses, such as the internal place, are what is seen. The wisdom that sees this emptiness is called the seer. The wisdom that sees emptiness is also emptiness, so it is said to be the emptiness of emptiness. And wisdom arises from emptiness, but it is said to be emptiness. This wisdom is also emptiness, so it is called the emptiness of emptiness. The above five emptinesses are all dependent genitive constructions. The emptiness of the inner body, even the emptiness of emptiness, is therefore called the emptiness of emptiness, which is the same as in the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra (瑜伽師地論).'

The treatise says: 'That which is according to principle is called ultimate emptiness (Paramārtha-śūnyatā, 勝義空).'

The commentary says: 'The substance of that which is according to principle is the ultimate meaning (Paramārtha, 勝義), which is the suchness (Tathātā, 真如) of the dharma-nature. Because it is the meaning of excellence. Now saying 'as', the meaning is equivalent to 'excellence', because it is knowledge that accords with the truth, so it is called 'acting in accordance with reality'. 'Acting' is conditioned dharma, distinguishing it from unconditioned dharma, so it is called 'real'. Also saying 'principle', the meaning is equivalent to 'meaning', it is the realm observed by acting in accordance with reality. This 'as principle'

即空名如理空。是持業釋。但言如理如勝義釋。勝之義故言勝義空。故持業釋。亦同瑜伽。此約詮說名勝義空。彼約體說名無性自性空。

論曰。菩薩修行至及無為空。

述曰。此據約菩薩為得有為善法故觀空釋。瑜伽約無色界空相。據空相釋有為空。據義各別。無為同此。此之二名亦依士釋。有為等之空故。即觀二為空。為二故別觀空。皆作此釋。

論曰。為于有情至畢竟空。

述曰。為有情故別觀于空。觀所為有情為空。此有情等畢竟不可得故。畢竟即空名畢竟空。瑜伽文意得通二釋。然無所為有情之言。

論曰。生死長遠至名無際空。

述曰。舊名為前後空。此依主釋。無際之空。

論曰。不觀為空至生死為空。

述曰。釋觀無際為空所由。若二乘不觀生死以為空故。便速厭舍而入涅槃。菩薩大士不厭生死。起大悲心利益含識故。觀生死體性亦空無厭著故。瑜伽論說。了知安立真如。有生滅住異性相續隨轉相。相空及無際空所治。此約生死總相。而說觀生死空。彼約別觀。于真如中有生集相。所觀別故不相違也。

論曰。為所修善至名無散空。

述曰。舊論名不捨空。令善法不捨故觀空。此言散者。即是舍義。為善故別觀空。或觀善為空。皆不

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：『即空名如理空』（『即空』之名，符合真如之理，故名『如理空』）。這是持業釋（指『如理』修飾『空』）。但如果說是『如理如勝義釋』（符合真如之理，如同勝義諦），因為『勝』有殊勝之義，所以說是『勝義空』。因此是持業釋。這也與《瑜伽師地論》的觀點相同。這裡是從詮釋的角度說『勝義空』，而《瑜伽師地論》是從本體的角度說『無性自性空』。

論曰：菩薩修行至及無為空。

述曰：這是根據菩薩爲了獲得有為善法而觀空的解釋。《瑜伽師地論》是根據沒有**空相，而根據空相來解釋有為空。根據意義各有不同。無為也與此相同。這兩個名稱也是依士釋（指『有為』等之『空』）。即觀察有為等為空。爲了有為等，所以分別觀察空。都可以這樣解釋。

論曰：為于有情至畢竟空。

述曰：爲了有情眾生，所以分別觀察空。觀察所為的有情眾生為空。因為這些有情眾生畢竟不可得，所以畢竟是空，名為『畢竟空』。《瑜伽師地論》的文意可以有兩種解釋。但是沒有『所為有情』的說法。

論曰：生死長遠至名無際空。

述曰：舊譯名為『前後空』。這是依主釋（『無際』之『空』）。

論曰：不觀為空至生死為空。

述曰：解釋觀察無際為空的原因。如果二乘人不觀察生死為空，就會很快厭離而進入涅槃。菩薩大士不厭離生死，發起大悲心利益眾生，所以觀察生死的體性也是空，沒有厭惡和執著。《瑜伽師地論》說：了知安立真如（tathata，事物的真實如是之性），有生滅住異性相續隨轉相，相空及無際空所對治。這是從生死的總相來說，而說觀察生死空。《瑜伽師地論》是從分別觀察的角度，在真如中有生集相，所觀察的對象不同，所以不相違背。

論曰：為所修善至名無散空。

述曰：舊論名為『不捨空』。爲了使善法不捨棄而觀察空。這裡說的『散』，就是捨棄的意思。爲了善法，所以分別觀察空。或者觀察善法為空，都不捨棄。

【English Translation】 English version: 'That which is empty is called 'emptiness as it is' (the name 'that which is empty' conforms to the principle of suchness, hence it is called 'emptiness as it is'). This is a karmadharaya compound (referring to 'as it is' modifying 'emptiness'). But if it is said 'as it is, like the ultimate meaning' (conforming to the principle of suchness, like the ultimate truth), because 'ultimate' has the meaning of excellence, it is called 'ultimate emptiness'. Therefore, it is a karmadharaya compound. This is also the same as the view in the Yogacarabhumi-sastra (Treatise on the Stages of Yoga Practice). Here, 'ultimate emptiness' is spoken of from the perspective of interpretation, while the Yogacarabhumi-sastra speaks of 'self-nature emptiness of no nature' from the perspective of substance.

Treatise says: Bodhisattvas cultivate until they reach non-active emptiness.

Commentary says: This explanation is based on the fact that Bodhisattvas observe emptiness in order to obtain conditioned virtuous dharmas. The Yogacarabhumi-sastra explains conditioned emptiness based on the absence of **emptiness-aspects, and based on emptiness-aspects. The meanings are different. Non-action is the same as this. These two names are also dependent possessive compounds (referring to the 'emptiness' of 'conditioned' etc.). That is, observing conditioned things etc. as empty. For the sake of conditioned things etc., emptiness is observed separately. All can be explained in this way.

Treatise says: For sentient beings, until ultimate emptiness.

Commentary says: For the sake of sentient beings, emptiness is observed separately. Observing the sentient beings for whom it is done as empty. Because these sentient beings are ultimately unattainable, they are ultimately empty, called 'ultimate emptiness'. The meaning of the text in the Yogacarabhumi-sastra can be interpreted in two ways. However, there is no mention of 'sentient beings for whom it is done'.

Treatise says: The long duration of birth and death, until boundless emptiness.

Commentary says: The old translation was called 'before and after emptiness'. This is a dependent possessive compound ('boundless' of 'emptiness').

Treatise says: Not observing as empty, until birth and death as empty.

Commentary says: Explaining the reason for observing boundlessness as empty. If those of the Two Vehicles (Sravakas and Pratyekabuddhas) do not observe birth and death as empty, they will quickly become disgusted and enter Nirvana. Bodhisattva-mahasattvas do not become disgusted with birth and death, and generate great compassion to benefit sentient beings, so they observe the nature of birth and death as also empty, without disgust or attachment. The Yogacarabhumi-sastra says: Knowing and establishing suchness (tathata), there are the aspects of arising, ceasing, abiding, changing nature, continuity of characteristics, and the aspects of emptiness and boundless emptiness that are counteracted. This is speaking from the general aspect of birth and death, and saying that birth and death are observed as empty. The Yogacarabhumi-sastra is from the perspective of separate observation, in suchness there are aspects of arising and gathering, the objects of observation are different, so they do not contradict each other.

Treatise says: For the virtuous deeds cultivated, until non-abandoning emptiness.

Commentary says: The old treatise was called 'non-abandoning emptiness'. In order to prevent virtuous dharmas from being abandoned, emptiness is observed. The 'scattering' mentioned here means abandoning. For the sake of virtuous dharmas, emptiness is observed separately. Or observing virtuous dharmas as empty, all are not abandoned.

舍之空。依主得稱。二乘入涅槃善根便盡。菩薩不爾。觀為空也。瑜伽論說。了知真如。有無為相無變異相。由無為空無變異空除遣。此約所為善法故。觀空名不捨空。彼約所觀之空。不論所為。名無變異空。以不捨空即無變異故。

論曰。諸聖種姓至名本性空。

述曰。舊論云性空。為本性故觀空。或觀本性為空。瑜伽說。了知受用義男女承事等相應故。有內安樂相外凈妙相。此由內外空本性空除遣。此約所為。彼約所治。所治之善令姓清凈。令姓凈時即有所治。故不相違。所望別故。

論曰。菩薩為得至名為相空。

述曰。為得大士三十二相八十隨好。舊云小相。而觀此為空。或為此別觀空。瑜伽說。了知真如義故。有生住等性隨轉相。由相空能治。此約所為。彼約所治理準前釋。

論曰。菩薩為令至一切法空。

述曰。或觀此為空。或為令觀彼為空。以上此例皆依主釋。瑜伽了知法義故有種種文字相。由一切法空能遣。此約所為。彼約所治。亦不相違。準同上釋。

論曰。是十四空至說名為空。

述曰。釋立十四空之所由。謂隨所治所為自性差別而安立故有十四也。既言是空。何者空體。因出空體。便生下文。

論頌曰。補特伽羅法至故別立二空。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本捨棄空性，依賴於主而獲得名號。二乘（Sravakas and Pratyekabuddhas）入涅槃后，善根便會耗盡，但菩薩（Bodhisattva）不會這樣，因為菩薩觀照萬法為空性。《瑜伽師地論》（Yogacarabhumi-sastra）中說，了知真如（Tathata），具有無為之相和無變異之相，通過無為空和無變異空來去除這些相。這是從所修的善法方面來說的，所以觀空被稱為不捨空。而《瑜伽師地論》是從所觀照的空性方面來說的，不涉及所修的善法，所以稱為無變異空。因為不捨空，所以就是無變異。

論曰：諸聖種姓至名本性空。

述曰：舊論中說性空，因為本性是空性，所以觀空，或者觀本性為空性。《瑜伽師地論》中說，了知受用義，男女承事等相應，所以具有內安樂相和外凈妙相。這是通過內外空和本性空來去除這些相。這是從所修的方面來說的，而《瑜伽師地論》是從所對治的方面來說的。所對治的善法能使種姓清凈，使種姓清凈時，就有所對治，所以不相違背，因為所期望的不同。

論曰：菩薩為得至名為相空。

述曰：爲了獲得大丈夫的三十二相（32 major marks）和八十隨好（80 minor marks），舊論中稱為小相，而觀照這些相為空性，或者爲了這些相而特別觀空。《瑜伽師地論》中說，了知真如義，所以具有生住等性隨轉相，通過相空能夠對治這些相。這是從所修的方面來說的，而《瑜伽師地論》是從所對治的方面來說的，可以參照前面的解釋。

論曰：菩薩為令至一切法空。

述曰：或者觀照這些法為空性，或者爲了使眾生觀照這些法為空性。以上這些例子都是依主釋。《瑜伽師地論》中了知法義，所以具有種種文字相，通過一切法空能夠去除這些相。這是從所修的方面來說的，而《瑜伽師地論》是從所對治的方面來說的，也不相違背，可以參照上面的解釋。

論曰：是十四空至說名為空。

述曰：解釋建立十四空的原因，是因為隨著所對治和所修的自性差別而安立，所以有十四空。既然說是空，那麼空的本體是什麼？因此引出空的本體，便產生了下文。

論頌曰：補特伽羅法至故別立二空。

【English Translation】 English version Relinquishing emptiness, one gains a designation by relying on a master. When those of the Two Vehicles (Sravakas and Pratyekabuddhas) enter Nirvana, their roots of goodness are exhausted. But Bodhisattvas (Bodhisattva) are not like this, because Bodhisattvas contemplate all dharmas as emptiness. The Yogacarabhumi-sastra (Yogacarabhumi-sastra) says that realizing Suchness (Tathata), one possesses the characteristics of non-conditioned and non-change. These characteristics are removed by the emptiness of non-doing and the emptiness of non-change. This is from the perspective of the good deeds that are cultivated, so contemplating emptiness is called not abandoning emptiness. The Yogacarabhumi-sastra is from the perspective of the emptiness that is contemplated, not involving the good deeds that are cultivated, so it is called the emptiness of non-change. Because one does not abandon emptiness, it is therefore non-change.

Treatise says: The noble lineages... to named essential nature emptiness.

Commentary says: The old treatise says essential nature emptiness, because essential nature is emptiness, therefore contemplate emptiness, or contemplate essential nature as emptiness. The Yogacarabhumi-sastra says that realizing the meaning of enjoyment, the corresponding service of men and women, etc., therefore one possesses the characteristics of inner peace and outer purity. These characteristics are removed by inner and outer emptiness and essential nature emptiness. This is from the perspective of what is cultivated, while the Yogacarabhumi-sastra is from the perspective of what is counteracted. The good deeds that are counteracted can purify the lineage. When the lineage is purified, there is something to be counteracted, so there is no contradiction, because what is desired is different.

Treatise says: Bodhisattvas, in order to attain... to named characteristic emptiness.

Commentary says: In order to attain the thirty-two major marks (32 major marks) and eighty minor marks (80 minor marks) of a great being, the old treatise calls them minor marks, and contemplates these marks as emptiness, or specifically contemplates emptiness for these marks. The Yogacarabhumi-sastra says that realizing the meaning of Suchness, therefore one possesses the characteristics of arising, abiding, etc., that follow along. These characteristics can be counteracted by characteristic emptiness. This is from the perspective of what is cultivated, while the Yogacarabhumi-sastra is from the perspective of what is counteracted, which can be explained by referring to the previous explanation.

Treatise says: Bodhisattvas, in order to cause... to all dharma emptiness.

Commentary says: Or contemplate these dharmas as emptiness, or in order to cause sentient beings to contemplate these dharmas as emptiness. The above examples are all dependent possessive explanations. The Yogacarabhumi-sastra realizes the meaning of the Dharma, therefore one possesses various characteristics of language. These characteristics can be removed by the emptiness of all dharmas. This is from the perspective of what is cultivated, while the Yogacarabhumi-sastra is from the perspective of what is counteracted, and there is no contradiction, which can be explained by referring to the above explanation.

Treatise says: These fourteen emptinesses... to said to be emptiness.

Commentary says: Explains the reason for establishing the fourteen emptinesses, which is because they are established according to the differences in the nature of what is counteracted and what is cultivated, therefore there are fourteen emptinesses. Since it is said to be emptiness, then what is the substance of emptiness? Therefore, the substance of emptiness is introduced, and the following text arises.

Verse says: Pudgala dharma... therefore separately establish two emptinesses.

述曰。上三句出二空。下一句結成也。上三句初二句解無性空。次一句解無性自性空。

論曰。補特伽羅至名無性空。

述曰。解初二句頌也。不遮假有。但說實無。無性之空即是法性。無性即空。此約所無空門空也。依此為門方顯空理。

論曰。此無性空至名無性自性空。

述曰。此前二無性所顯之空即真如理非無自體。此空即以無二性為自體。故成有體也。名無性自性空。解第三句頌也。

論曰。於前所設至別立二空。

述曰。前雖約詮別立十四。顯空自性。故說此二解頌第四句也。一切空相不過此二。名二無二者。無二由二無為門顯無二空故。若如上說。為此事故別觀空者。即是無性自性空。若觀此為空即無性空。離法執等故。

論曰。此為遮止至立后二空。

述曰。釋立二空意也。謂有難言。前十四空不出后二。別說后二有何用也。答為遮於我法增益執故說無性空。為遮于空性如理損減執故說無性自性空。我法無故唯有增益。空性有故唯有損減。如其次第配后二空。此中說我法唯增益執。下真實品相真實中。於法及我。所有增益及損減。執見若知此故彼便不轉。是遍計所執相何故復有損減執耶。此中約體。體無故唯增益。彼通約名撥。名為無亦成損

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：窺基法師述曰：上面三句經文出自二空（兩種空性）。下面一句經文是總結。上面三句經文中，最初兩句解釋無性空（本質為空），接下來一句解釋無性自性空（無自性的自性為空）。

世親菩薩論曰：補特伽羅（pudgala，指個體、人）乃至名為無性空。

窺基法師述曰：解釋最初兩句偈頌。不遮止假有（暫時存在的現象），只是說實體不存在。無性的空即是法性（dharma-dhātu，宇宙萬法的本性）。無性即是空。這是從所無的空門來說空。依據這個作為門徑，才能顯現空性的道理。

世親菩薩論曰：此無性空乃至名為無性自性空。

窺基法師述曰：前面兩個無性所顯現的空，即是真如理（tathatā，事物的真實如是的狀態），並非沒有自體。這個空就是以無二性作為自體，所以成為有體。名為無性自性空。解釋第三句偈頌。

世親菩薩論曰：於前所設乃至別立二空。

窺基法師述曰：前面雖然依據詮釋不同而設立十四種空，是爲了顯現空的自性。所以說這兩種空解釋第四句偈頌。一切空的相狀都離不開這兩種空。名為二無二者，無二是由於二無作為門徑來顯現無二的空，所以這樣說。如果像上面所說，因為這個緣故特別觀察空，那就是無性自性空。如果觀察這個為空，那就是無性空，遠離對法執著等等的緣故。

世親菩薩論曰：此為遮止乃至立后二空。

窺基法師述曰：解釋設立兩種空性的用意。有人質疑說，前面的十四種空沒有超出後面的兩種空，特別說後面的兩種空有什麼用呢？回答說，爲了遮止對於我法（ātman and dharma，自我和現象）的增益執著，所以說無性空。爲了遮止對於空性的不如理的損減執著，所以說無性自性空。因為我法不存在，所以只有增益。空性存在，所以只有損減。像這樣依次對應後面的兩種空。這裡說我法只有增益執著。在《真實品》的相真實中，對於法及我，所有的增益及損減，如果知道這些執見，那麼這些執見就不會轉變。這是遍計所執相（parikalpita-lakṣaṇa，完全虛構的性質），為什麼還會有損減執著呢？這裡是從本體上來說，本體不存在，所以只有增益。那裡是通約名稱來否定，名稱為無也成為損減。

【English Translation】 English version: Master Kuiji states: The above three sentences come from the two emptinesses (two kinds of emptiness). The following sentence is a conclusion. Among the above three sentences, the first two sentences explain anutpāda-śūnyatā (emptiness of no origination), and the next sentence explains anutpāda-svabhāva-śūnyatā (emptiness of no origination of own-nature).

Vasubandhu states: Pudgala (individual, person) up to named anutpāda-śūnyatā.

Master Kuiji states: Explaining the first two verses. It does not negate provisional existence (temporary phenomena), but only says that substance does not exist. The emptiness of no origination is dharma-dhātu (the nature of all phenomena in the universe). No origination is emptiness. This speaks of emptiness from the perspective of the gate of what is absent. Based on this as a gateway, the principle of emptiness can be revealed.

Vasubandhu states: This anutpāda-śūnyatā up to named anutpāda-svabhāva-śūnyatā.

Master Kuiji states: The emptiness revealed by the previous two no-originations is tathatā (the true suchness of things), not without its own substance. This emptiness takes non-duality as its own substance, so it becomes substantial. It is named anutpāda-svabhāva-śūnyatā. Explaining the third verse.

Vasubandhu states: In the foregoing up to separately establishing two emptinesses.

Master Kuiji states: Although fourteen kinds of emptiness are established based on different interpretations, it is to reveal the own-nature of emptiness. Therefore, it is said that these two emptinesses explain the fourth verse. All aspects of emptiness cannot be separated from these two emptinesses. It is named 'two non-two', because non-duality is revealed by the two non-existences as a gateway, so it is said. If, as mentioned above, one particularly observes emptiness for this reason, that is anutpāda-svabhāva-śūnyatā. If one observes this as emptiness, that is anutpāda-śūnyatā, because it is away from attachment to phenomena, etc.

Vasubandhu states: This is to prevent up to establishing the latter two emptinesses.

Master Kuiji states: Explaining the intention of establishing two kinds of emptiness. Some people question, the previous fourteen kinds of emptiness do not exceed the latter two kinds of emptiness, what is the use of specifically saying the latter two kinds of emptiness? The answer is, in order to prevent the attachment of increasing to ātman and dharma (self and phenomena), therefore it is said anutpāda-śūnyatā. In order to prevent the irrational diminishing attachment to the nature of emptiness, therefore it is said anutpāda-svabhāva-śūnyatā. Because ātman and dharma do not exist, there is only increase. Emptiness exists, so there is only decrease. Like this, correspond to the latter two emptinesses in order. Here it says that ātman and dharma only have increasing attachment. In the true aspect of the Satya-lakṣaṇa (chapter on truth), for phenomena and self, all increase and decrease, if one knows these attachments, then these attachments will not transform. This is parikalpita-lakṣaṇa (completely fabricated nature), why is there still diminishing attachment? Here it is said from the perspective of the substance, the substance does not exist, so there is only increase. There, it is generally denying the name, the name being non-existent also becomes diminishing.

減。故不相違。

論曰。如是已顯至云何應知。

述曰。結第四生第五。于中有二頌。初頌出成立之因。后頌結已成義。

論頌曰。此若無雜染至功用應無果。

述曰。既言空性。應無凈染。如太虛空。為成此義故說此頌。初半成有染。後半成有凈。

論曰。若諸法空至應自解脫。

述曰。釋成有染。返難無染。

論曰。若對治已生至勤勞無果。

述曰。成有染凈。返難無凈。

論曰。既爾頌曰至由客塵所染。

述曰。上二句立二宗。下二句立二因。

論曰。云何非染非不凈至本凈故。

述曰。頌第一句與第二句體雖無別。約所非及所詮。別成二句也。然今以義同故。乃雙牒之。第一句中非染即是第二句中非不凈。牒此雙問。以第三句頌答。以心性本凈故。下準此知。

論曰。云何非不染非凈至所染故。

述曰。雙問如前。舉第四句答。由客塵所染故。

論曰。是名成立空差別義。

述曰。此總結也。

論曰。此前空義至相安立。

述曰。上來已別解空五義訖。今總結為二。以第一是空之相。餘四門安立。于空遮于外難等故但分二。

論曰。相復有二謂有及無。

述曰。相中初頌第一

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：減損。所以這並不矛盾。

論曰：如上已經闡明，直到『云何應知』（應該如何理解）？

述曰：總結第四生和第五生。其中有兩頌。第一頌提出成立的理由，第二頌總結已經成立的意義。

論頌曰：此若無雜染，乃至功用應無果。

述曰：既然說空性，應該沒有凈和染，就像太虛空一樣。爲了成立這個意義，所以說這個頌。前半部分成立有染，後半部分成立有凈。

論曰：如果諸法是空的，乃至應該自己解脫。

述曰：解釋成立有染，反駁沒有染。

論曰：如果對治已經產生，乃至勤勞就沒有結果。

述曰：成立有染和凈，反駁沒有凈。

論曰：既然如此，頌曰：乃至由客塵所染。

述曰：上面兩句建立兩種宗派，下面兩句建立兩種原因。

論曰：為什麼說非染非不凈，乃至本凈故？

述曰：頌的第一句和第二句，體性雖然沒有差別，但是從所否定的和所詮釋的角度來說，分別成立兩句。然而現在因為意義相同，所以就重複說了。第一句中的『非染』就是第二句中的『非不凈』。重複這些來提問，用第三句頌來回答，因為心性本來清凈。下面可以依此類推。

論曰：為什麼說非不染非凈，乃至所染故？

述曰：重複提問如前。舉出第四句來回答，因為被客塵所染。

論曰：這叫做成立空的差別義。

述曰：這是總結。

論曰：此前空的意義，乃至相安立。

述曰：上面已經分別解釋了空的五種意義完畢。現在總結為兩種。因為第一種是空的相狀，其餘四種是安立。對於空，遮止外來的詰難等等，所以只分為兩種。

論曰：相又有兩種，即有和無。

述曰：相中初頌第一

【English Translation】 English version: Reduced. Therefore, it is not contradictory.

Treatise says: As has been shown above, up to 'How should it be known?'

Commentary says: Concluding the fourth and fifth births. There are two verses in it. The first verse puts forward the reason for establishment, and the second verse concludes the established meaning.

Verse says: If this has no defilement, then the effort should have no result.

Commentary says: Since it is said that emptiness (śūnyatā) exists, there should be no purity or defilement, just like empty space. In order to establish this meaning, this verse is spoken. The first half establishes defilement, and the second half establishes purity.

Treatise says: If all dharmas are empty, then one should liberate oneself.

Commentary says: Explaining the establishment of defilement, refuting the absence of defilement.

Treatise says: If the antidote has already arisen, then diligent effort will have no result.

Commentary says: Establishing defilement and purity, refuting the absence of purity.

Treatise says: Since it is so, the verse says: Even by adventitious defilement.

Commentary says: The above two sentences establish two tenets, and the following two sentences establish two reasons.

Treatise says: Why is it said to be neither defiled nor impure, even by its originally pure nature?

Commentary says: Although there is no difference in nature between the first and second lines of the verse, they separately establish two lines from the perspective of what is negated and what is explained. However, now because the meaning is the same, it is repeated twice. 'Not defiled' in the first line is 'not impure' in the second line. Repeating these to ask, answering with the third line of the verse, because the nature of the mind is originally pure. The following can be inferred by analogy.

Treatise says: Why is it said to be neither undefiled nor pure, even by what is defiled?

Commentary says: Repeating the question as before. Citing the fourth line to answer, because it is defiled by adventitious dust.

Treatise says: This is called establishing the meaning of the difference of emptiness.

Commentary says: This is the conclusion.

Treatise says: The previous meaning of emptiness, even the establishment of aspects.

Commentary says: The above has separately explained the five meanings of emptiness. Now it is summarized into two. Because the first is the characteristic of emptiness, and the remaining four are establishments. For emptiness, preventing external difficulties, etc., so it is only divided into two.

Treatise says: There are also two aspects, namely existence and non-existence.

Commentary says: The first verse in the aspect

句云。無二有無故。是此二相也。

論曰。空性有相至以為其相。

述曰。無即二取非有。雖是空非空性。今辯空性故。唯解有相。中第一頌第二第三句云非有等者。即此所離也。

論曰。應知安立即異門等。

述曰。上已解相。此解安立即是異門義故差別成立四也。

辯障品第二

覆所知境令智不生。礙真涅槃令不得證。由此二義立障名。此品廣釋故稱為辯。

論曰。已辯其相障今當說。

述曰。此一品中大有三。初結前起后以發論端。二頌曰下依宗正釋。三前障總義下總結上義。此即初也。

論頌曰。具分及一分至說障二種姓。

述曰。此即第二當宗正釋。此一品中合十七頌。十能作中雖有二頌。世親傍引非根本說。十七頌中合分為五。初一頌明具分等五障。次有二頌明正加行障。即是九結。次有六頌半明因障。約十能作因以辯障體。次有六頌半明覺分六度十地別障。後有一頌結歸二障許滅解脫故須說意。然下總結文以義段分故為十一。以能所障體各別故。今此所判以文義合明。段次為論故分為五。此初一頌即明具分等五種障也。上三句出五障體。下一句出所障人。雖出障能具分攝盡。然約別義更分餘四。

論曰。具分障者至種姓法故。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：

經文中說：『無二有無故』，這就是這兩種相（lakshana）的含義。論中說：空性的相，達到以其為相的程度。註釋說：『無』，就是二取（dvaya-graha）所否定的『有』。雖然是『空』，但不是『空性』。現在辨析的是『空性』，所以只解釋『有相』。《中論》第一頌的第二、第三句說『非有』等，就是這裡所要遠離的。論中說：應該知道安立（avasthita）就是異門（nana-mukha）等。註釋說：上面已經解釋了相，這裡解釋安立，就是異門之義，所以差別成立了四種。辯障品第二覆蓋所知境（jneya-vastu），使智慧不能產生；阻礙真涅槃（satya-nirvana），使人不能證得。由於這兩種意義，所以立名為『障』。此品廣泛解釋，所以稱為『辯』。論中說：已經辨析了相，現在應當說障。註釋說：這一品中大體有三部分。第一部分總結前面，引起後面，以發起論端。第二部分從『頌曰』開始，依據宗義正式解釋。第三部分從『前障總義』開始，總結上面的意義。這裡是第一部分。論頌說：『具分及一分，至說障二種姓。』註釋說：這是第二部分，當宗正式解釋。這一品中共有十七頌。十能作（dasa-samartha）中雖然有兩頌，是世親（Vasubandhu）菩薩旁引的，不是根本的說法。十七頌中合起來分為五部分。第一頌說明具分等五種障。其次有兩頌說明正加行障（samyak-prayogika-avarana），也就是九結（nava-samyojana）。其次有六頌半說明因障（hetu-avarana），約十能作因來辨析障的體性。其次有六頌半說明覺分（bodhi-paksa）、六度（paramita）、十地（dasa-bhumi）的差別障。最後一頌總結歸於二障，認為滅解脫（nirodha-moksha）的緣故，所以需要說明其意義。然而下面的總結文以義段來分，所以分為十一部分。因為能障和所障的體性各自不同。現在這裡所判定的，是以文義合起來說明段次，作為論述的緣故，所以分為五部分。這第一頌就是說明具分等五種障。上面三句說出五障的體性，下一句說出所障的人。雖然說出障能具分攝盡，但是約別義來說，更分為其餘四種。論中說：具分障（purna-bhaga-avarana）是指種姓法（gotra-dharma）的緣故。

【English Translation】 English version:

The verse says: 'Because there is no duality of existence and non-existence,' this is the meaning of these two characteristics (lakshana). The treatise says: The characteristic of emptiness reaches the point of taking it as its characteristic. The commentary says: 'Non-existence' is the 'existence' negated by dualistic grasping (dvaya-graha). Although it is 'emptiness,' it is not 'the nature of emptiness.' Now, what is being discussed is 'the nature of emptiness,' so only the 'characteristic of existence' is explained. The second and third lines of the first verse of the Mulamadhyamakakarika (Fundamental Verses on the Middle Way), which say 'not existence' and so on, are what is to be abandoned here. The treatise says: It should be known that establishment (avasthita) is different aspects (nana-mukha), and so on. The commentary says: The characteristic has already been explained above. Here, the explanation of establishment is the meaning of different aspects, so the difference establishes four. Chapter Two: Discrimination of Obstructions Covering the knowable realm (jneya-vastu), preventing wisdom from arising; obstructing true Nirvana (satya-nirvana), preventing one from attaining it. Due to these two meanings, the name 'obstruction' is established. This chapter explains extensively, so it is called 'Discrimination'. The treatise says: Having discriminated the characteristics, now the obstructions should be discussed. The commentary says: This chapter has three main parts. The first part summarizes the previous and introduces the following, initiating the discussion. The second part, starting with 'The verse says,' formally explains according to the doctrine. The third part, starting with 'The general meaning of the previous obstructions,' summarizes the above meanings. This is the first part. The verse says: 'Complete division and partial division, up to speaking of the two lineages of obstructions.' The commentary says: This is the second part, formally explaining the doctrine. This chapter has a total of seventeen verses. Although there are two verses in the ten efficient causes (dasa-samartha), they are side references by Vasubandhu (Vasubandhu) and not fundamental statements. The seventeen verses are divided into five parts. The first verse explains the five obstructions, such as complete division. The next two verses explain the obstruction of right effort (samyak-prayogika-avarana), which is the nine fetters (nava-samyojana). The next six and a half verses explain the causal obstruction (hetu-avarana), discussing the nature of the obstruction in terms of the ten efficient causes. The next six and a half verses explain the separate obstructions of the factors of enlightenment (bodhi-paksa), the six perfections (paramita), and the ten grounds (dasa-bhumi). The last verse concludes by returning to the two obstructions, believing that because of cessation and liberation (nirodha-moksha), it is necessary to explain their meaning. However, the concluding text below divides by semantic sections, so it is divided into eleven parts. Because the nature of the obstructing and the obstructed are different. The determination here is to combine the text and meaning to explain the order of the sections, so it is divided into five parts. This first verse explains the five obstructions, such as complete division. The above three lines state the nature of the five obstructions, and the next line states the person being obstructed. Although it is said that the obstruction can completely encompass the division, it is further divided into the remaining four in terms of separate meanings. The treatise says: Complete division obstruction (purna-bhaga-avarana) refers to the nature of lineage (gotra-dharma).

述曰。舊論初言遍後言一方。于菩薩見道及如來位。煩惱所知二具為障。悲智二行各別障故。雖知菩薩唯求于智。即由智故亦住涅槃。故二為障。余文易知。

論曰。增盛障者至即彼等分行。

述曰。舊論初言重。后與此同。此二障中。初是增益。后是等分。對法十三瑜伽五十八九皆有廣說。然但有鈍煩惱分。為此等分見利惑亦得分。不理亦得分。諸處多隨說多隨說鈍煩惱說。又何故不說薄塵。以此二障如下自說初障加行后障至得故。薄分行略不明之。又即增盛成平等。平等即成薄塵。薄塵即攝入平等中。以無別障所以不說。此上四障皆先牒文而後申義。次後一障先申義后結文也。

論曰。取捨生死至有取捨障。

述曰。取涅槃捨生死是法執。若有便同二乘。無無住處故。成菩薩大悲者障。今者不欲捨生死求涅槃。起大悲心得無住處。便無此障。此等諸障如唯識第十。

論曰。如是五障至二種種姓。

述曰。此釋第四句頌結上五障。隨其所應。當障者說障三乘。非即定配。謂第一第五唯障菩薩。第二唯障二乘。第三第四雙障三乘。故成三句。無第四句。或唯二句。第三第四亦唯障二乘故。

論曰。複次頌曰至遠離遍知故。

述曰。第二段文明正加行九結障。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：窺基法師述評：舊的理論最初說煩惱障和所知障是普遍存在的，後來又說它們只存在於某一方面。在菩薩見道位和如來位，煩惱障和所知障這兩種障礙都存在。因為悲和智這兩種修行方式各自有障礙。雖然知道菩薩只追求智慧，但因為智慧的緣故，也會安住于涅槃。所以這兩種障礙都存在。其餘的文字容易理解。

世親菩薩的《攝大乘論》說：『增盛障』乃至『即彼等分行』。

窺基法師述評：舊的理論最初說是『重』，後來與這裡相同。在這兩種障礙中，前者是增益，後者是等分。《對法論》第十三卷、《瑜伽師地論》第五十八卷和第五十九卷都有詳細的說明。然而，只有遲鈍的煩惱才屬於等分。見道位的利使惑也能屬於等分，不理智也能屬於等分。各處大多是隨順遲鈍的煩惱而說的。又為什麼不說『薄塵』呢？因為這兩種障礙如下文所說，最初的障礙是加行位，後來的障礙是證得位。『薄分行』略而不明顯。又，增盛會變成平等，平等會變成薄塵，薄塵會攝入平等之中。因為沒有其他的障礙，所以不說。以上四種障礙都是先引用原文，然後再闡述意義。接下來的一個障礙是先闡述意義，然後再總結原文。

世親菩薩的《攝大乘論》說：『取捨生死』乃至『有取捨障』。

窺基法師述評：取涅槃而捨生死是法執。如果這樣，就和二乘一樣了，因為沒有無住處涅槃。這會成為菩薩大悲心的障礙。現在不想要捨棄生死而追求涅槃，生起大悲心就能得到無住處涅槃，也就沒有這種障礙了。這些障礙就像《唯識論》第十卷所說。

世親菩薩的《攝大乘論》說：『如是五障』乃至『二種種姓』。

窺基法師述評：這是解釋第四句偈頌，總結以上五種障礙。根據其所應，當障礙者說障礙三乘，並非一定對應。第一種和第五種障礙只障礙菩薩，第二種障礙只障礙二乘，第三種和第四種障礙同時障礙三乘。所以形成了三句，沒有第四句。或者只有兩句，因為第三種和第四種障礙也只障礙二乘。

世親菩薩的《攝大乘論》說：『複次頌曰』乃至『遠離遍知故』。

窺基法師述評：第二段文字說明了正加行位的九種結縛障礙。

【English Translation】 English version: Shu (Commentary) says: The old theory initially stated that both afflictive and cognitive obscurations (煩惱障, fánnǎo zhàng and 所知障, suǒ zhī zhàng) are pervasive, but later it said they only exist in one aspect. In the stages of Bodhisattva's Path of Seeing and the position of Tathagata (如來, Rúlái), both afflictive and cognitive obscurations are obstacles. This is because the practices of compassion and wisdom each have their own obstacles. Although it is known that Bodhisattvas only seek wisdom, they also abide in Nirvana (涅槃, Nièpán) because of wisdom. Therefore, both are obstacles. The rest of the text is easy to understand.

The Treatise on the Summary of the Great Vehicle by Vasubandhu (世親, Shìqīn) says: 'The increasing obscuration' to 'that is, their equal part practice'.

Shu (Commentary) says: The old theory initially said 'heavy', later it is the same as this. Among these two obscurations, the former is increasing, and the latter is equal part. The thirteenth volume of Abhidharmasamuccaya (對法論, Duìfǎ lùn) and the fifty-eighth and fifty-ninth volumes of Yogacarabhumi-sastra (瑜伽師地論, Yúqié shī dì lùn) all have detailed explanations. However, only dull afflictions belong to the equal part. The afflictions of the Path of Seeing can also belong to the equal part, and non-reasoning can also belong to the equal part. In many places, it is mostly said according to dull afflictions. Also, why not say 'thin dust'? Because these two obscurations, as mentioned below, the initial obscuration is the stage of application, and the later obscuration is the stage of attainment. 'Thin part practice' is omitted and not clear. Also, increasing becomes equality, equality becomes thin dust, and thin dust is included in equality. Because there is no other obscuration, it is not mentioned. The above four obscurations all quote the original text first, and then explain the meaning. The next obscuration explains the meaning first, and then concludes the original text.

The Treatise on the Summary of the Great Vehicle by Vasubandhu says: 'Taking and abandoning Samsara (生死, shēngsǐ)' to 'there is the obscuration of taking and abandoning'.

Shu (Commentary) says: Taking Nirvana and abandoning Samsara is attachment to Dharma (法執, fǎ zhí). If so, it would be the same as the Two Vehicles (二乘, èr shèng), because there is no non-abiding Nirvana. This would become an obstacle to the Bodhisattva's great compassion. Now, not wanting to abandon Samsara and seek Nirvana, generating great compassion can obtain non-abiding Nirvana, and there is no such obstacle. These obscurations are like what is said in the tenth volume of Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi (唯識論, Wéishì lùn).

The Treatise on the Summary of the Great Vehicle by Vasubandhu says: 'These five obscurations' to 'two kinds of lineages'.

Shu (Commentary) says: This explains the fourth verse, summarizing the above five obscurations. According to what is appropriate, the obscuration that should be obstructed obstructs the Three Vehicles (三乘, sān shèng), not necessarily corresponding. The first and fifth obscurations only obstruct Bodhisattvas, the second obscuration only obstructs the Two Vehicles, and the third and fourth obscurations obstruct the Three Vehicles at the same time. Therefore, three sentences are formed, and there is no fourth sentence. Or there are only two sentences, because the third and fourth obscurations also only obstruct the Two Vehicles.

The Treatise on the Summary of the Great Vehicle by Vasubandhu says: 'Furthermore, the verse says' to 'because of being far from pervasive knowledge'.

Shu (Commentary) says: The second paragraph explains the nine bonds of obscuration in the stage of proper application.

於二頌中。初二句顯障數指障體。餘六句說所障。于中可知。

論曰。煩惱障者至九種結。

述曰。釋頌中初二句。此中雖實亦有所知障。煩惱粗略不說彼。此等九結如對法論第六末說。所障亦同。

論曰。愛結障厭至不能棄捨。

述曰。釋頌中第三句。恚所障舍即善中數。愛所障厭如唯識說。無貪一分雖無別數。即障無貪。雖恚亦應障于無貪。然隨別別□□而說。不可一例。

論曰。餘七結至如次障故。

述曰。此總舉意。言遍知者。以智慧遍知結法故。又解。遍知者。雖是無為。以慧能證從境為名。名為遍知。或無漏見能證遍知。說障遍知顯即障智。

論曰。說慢結至彼不斷故。

述曰。以修定時謂待勝法便有我慢間起。自恃陵他。由此為緣身見難斷。如對法第一等散亂中說。以我慢為身見苗。故言偽身見。如唯識第六疏會。然修善法時皆有此障。以證遍知現觀時勝。但據勝故。此唯說修現觀時故。對法等皆通說障。

論曰。無明結能障至諸取蘊故。

述曰。有漏五蘊能生身見故名彼事。

論曰。見結能障至謗滅故。

述曰。三見名見結。諸障雖通別障如文。

論曰。取結能障至為凈故。

述曰。二取名取結。緣戒及見

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：在第二首偈頌中，前兩句揭示了障礙的數量，指明了障礙的本體。其餘六句描述了所障礙的事物，從中可以得知。

論曰：煩惱障指的是九種結。

述曰：解釋偈頌中的前兩句。這裡實際上也有所知障，但煩惱比較粗略，所以沒有提及。這九種結如同《對法論》第六卷末尾所說，所障礙的事物也相同。

論曰：愛結障礙厭離，以至於不能捨棄。

述曰：解釋偈頌中的第三句。嗔恚所障礙的舍，是善法中的一種。愛結所障礙的厭離，如《唯識論》所說。無貪的一部分雖然沒有特別的法數，但它障礙無貪本身。雖然嗔恚也應該障礙無貪，但這是根據不同的情況分別說明，不能一概而論。

論曰：其餘七種結，依次障礙遍知等。

述曰：這裡總括地說明意思。說到『遍知』，是因為智慧能夠普遍地瞭解結的法性。另一種解釋是，『遍知』雖然是無為法，但慧能證得它，所以從所觀的境界而得名，稱為『遍知』。或者說，無漏的見能夠證得遍知，說障礙遍知，實際上就是障礙智慧。

論曰：說慢結障礙現觀，因為彼不斷故。

述曰：因為在修定時，如果遇到殊勝的法，就會有我慢產生，自恃而輕視他人。由於這個緣故，身見難以斷除，如同《對法論》第一卷等散亂中所說。因為我慢是身見的苗，所以說是虛偽的身見，如同《唯識論》第六卷疏會所說。然而，在修習善法的時候，都會有這種障礙。因為在證得遍知現觀的時候，我慢的障礙最為強烈，所以只是根據最突出的情況來說明。這裡只說了修習現觀時的情況，而《對法論》等則普遍地說明了各種障礙。

論曰：無明結能夠障礙於彼事，即諸取蘊故。

述曰：有漏的五蘊能夠產生身見，所以稱為『彼事』。

論曰：見結能夠障礙於滅，即謗滅故。

述曰：三種見（身見、邊見、邪見）稱為見結。各種障礙雖然是普遍性的，但這裡是分別說明其特別障礙的對象，如經文所說。

論曰：取結能夠障礙於凈，即為凈故。

述曰：兩種取（戒禁取、見取）稱為取結。緣于戒律和見解。

【English Translation】 English version: In the second verse, the first two lines reveal the number of obstacles and point to the substance of the obstacles. The remaining six lines describe what is obstructed, from which it can be known.

The Treatise says: The obstacle of afflictions refers to the nine bonds (結, jié).

The Commentary says: Explaining the first two lines of the verse. Although there is actually also the obstacle of what is knowable here, afflictions are relatively coarse, so it is not mentioned. These nine bonds are as described at the end of the sixth volume of the Abhidharma (對法論, Duìfǎ Lùn), and what is obstructed is the same.

The Treatise says: The bond of attachment obstructs revulsion, to the point of being unable to abandon it.

The Commentary says: Explaining the third line of the verse. The abandonment (舍, shě) obstructed by aversion is one of the good dharmas. The revulsion obstructed by the bond of attachment is as described in the Yogācāra (唯識, Wéishí). Although a portion of non-greed does not have a specific number, it obstructs non-greed itself. Although aversion should also obstruct non-greed, this is explained separately according to different situations and cannot be generalized.

The Treatise says: The remaining seven bonds obstruct thorough knowledge (遍知, biànzhī) and so on, in that order.

The Commentary says: This summarizes the meaning. Speaking of 'thorough knowledge,' it is because intelligence can universally understand the nature of the bonds. Another explanation is that although 'thorough knowledge' is unconditioned, wisdom can realize it, so it is named from the object of observation and called 'thorough knowledge.' Or, the unconditioned seeing can realize thorough knowledge, saying that obstructing thorough knowledge actually obstructs wisdom.

The Treatise says: Saying that the bond of pride obstructs direct perception (現觀, xiànguān), because it is not severed.

The Commentary says: Because when practicing samadhi (定時, dìngshí), if encountering a superior dharma, pride will arise, relying on oneself and belittling others. Due to this reason, the view of self (身見, shēn jiàn) is difficult to sever, as described in the first volume of the Abhidharma and so on, in the context of distraction. Because pride is the sprout of the view of self, it is called false view of self, as explained in the sixth volume of the Yogācāra commentary. However, when cultivating good dharmas, there will be this obstacle. Because the obstacle of pride is most intense when realizing direct perception of thorough knowledge, it is only explained according to the most prominent situation. This only speaks of the situation when practicing direct perception, while the Abhidharma and so on universally explain various obstacles.

The Treatise says: The bond of ignorance can obstruct that matter, namely the aggregates of grasping (取蘊, qǔ yùn).

The Commentary says: The conditioned five aggregates can generate the view of self, so they are called 'that matter.'

The Treatise says: The bond of views can obstruct cessation, namely slandering cessation.

The Commentary says: The three views (view of self, extreme view, wrong view) are called the bond of views. Although the various obstacles are universal, here they are separately explaining their particularly obstructed objects, as the text says.

The Treatise says: The bond of grasping can obstruct purity, namely for the sake of purity.

The Commentary says: The two grasps (grasping at precepts and vows, grasping at views) are called the bond of grasping. Related to precepts and views.

等故。皆取余法為凈。如唯識第六說。從勝障處故障道諦。

論曰。疑結能障至三寶功德故。

述曰。其文易知。然此中說行增處說。如邪見非不障三寶故。

論曰。嫉結能障至彼過失故。

述曰。于利養中。言等者等名譽也。然嫉他得利養等故障彼遍知。不應于利養等生嫉起貪等故。

論曰。慳結能障至資生具故。

述曰。寶者愛玩義。由慳愛染諸什物。故遠離遍知也。

論曰。復有別障至其相云何。

述曰。自下第三明因障也。此則第一標宗問竟。

論頌曰。無加行非處至不修治妙定。

述曰。自下第二隨問而答。于中有三。初明能障所障各異。第二複次如是諸障下。以十能作明此障義。第三所障十法次第義者。明善等法所障次第。自下初也。于中有三。初有五頌烈能障名。次有一頌烈所障名。後有半頌屬能所障。此中五頌烈障名也。頌別六障故成三十。

論曰。如是名為至其相云何。

述曰。指上問下第二段也。

論頌曰。善菩提攝受至自在名善等。

述曰。烈所障名也。

論曰。如是善等至幾種障耶。

述曰。指頌所明問能所障。如何屬著各有幾也。結第二段生第三段。

論頌曰。如是善等十各

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本因為這樣的緣故，他們都採取其他的法門作為清凈之法。正如《唯識》第六卷所說，從殊勝的障礙之處，阻礙了故障道諦（Arya-satya marga）的證悟。

論曰：疑結（vicikitsa）能夠障礙對三寶（Triratna）功德的信心。

述曰：這段文字容易理解。然而，這裡說的是在修行增長的地方說的。例如，邪見（mithya-drsti）並非不障礙對三寶的信心，只是這裡強調疑結的作用。

論曰：嫉結（irsya）能夠障礙對他人利養等方面的隨喜。

述曰：在利養方面，『等』字包括名譽等。然而，嫉妒他人獲得利養等，會阻礙對一切法的遍知（parijna）。不應該對利養等產生嫉妒，進而生起貪婪等煩惱。

論曰：慳結（matsarya）能夠障礙對資生具（upadhi）的佈施。

述曰：寶，有愛玩之意。由於慳吝，貪愛染著各種什物，因此遠離了遍知。

論曰：還有其他的障礙，它們的相狀是怎樣的呢？

述曰：從下面第三部分開始，闡明因障（hetu-avarana）。這裡是第一部分，標明宗旨的提問結束。

論頌曰：沒有加行（aprayoga），在不適當的地方（asthanayogah），懈怠（kausidya），沒有正念（asmrti），散亂（viksepa），不正知（asamprajanya），不修治妙定（asamahita）。

述曰：從下面第二部分開始，隨著提問而回答。其中有三個部分。首先闡明能障（avarana）和所障（avaraneya）各自不同。第二部分，『複次如是諸障』以下，用十種能作（karana）來闡明這種障礙的含義。第三部分，『所障十法次第義者』，闡明善等法所障礙的次第。從下面開始是第一部分。其中有三個部分。首先用五頌來列出能障的名稱。其次用一頌來列出所障的名稱。最後用半頌來歸屬能障和所障。這裡用五頌來列出障礙的名稱，因為每頌分別列出六種障礙，所以總共有三十種。

論曰：像這樣被稱為……它們的相狀是怎樣的呢？

述曰：指向上文，承接下文，是第二段。

論頌曰：善（kusala），菩提（bodhi）攝受，大悲（maha-karuna），聽聞（sruta），正信（sraddha），精進（virya），念（smrti），慧（prajna），止觀（samatha-vipassana），自在（vasita），名為善等。

述曰：列出所障的名稱。

論曰：像這樣，善等……有幾種障礙呢？

述曰：指著頌文所闡明的，提問能障和所障，如何歸屬，各有幾種。結束第二段，引出第三段。

論頌曰：像這樣，善等十種，各自……

【English Translation】 English version Therefore, they all adopt other methods as purification. As the sixth volume of 『Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi』 says, from the place of superior obstacles, it hinders the realization of the Arya-satya marga (Noble Truth of the Path).

Treatise says: The knot of doubt (vicikitsa) can obstruct faith in the merits of the Three Jewels (Triratna).

Commentary says: The text is easy to understand. However, it speaks of the place where practice increases. For example, wrong views (mithya-drsti) do not fail to obstruct faith in the Three Jewels, but here the function of the knot of doubt is emphasized.

Treatise says: The knot of jealousy (irsya) can obstruct rejoicing in the gains and offerings of others.

Commentary says: In terms of gains and offerings, the word 『etc.』 includes fame, etc. However, being jealous of others' gains and offerings hinders the comprehensive knowledge (parijna) of all dharmas. One should not be jealous of gains and offerings, thereby giving rise to greed and other afflictions.

Treatise says: The knot of stinginess (matsarya) can obstruct the giving of requisites (upadhi).

Commentary says: 『Treasure』 means to cherish and play with. Because of stinginess, attachment, and clinging to various things, one is far from comprehensive knowledge.

Treatise says: There are other obstacles, what are their characteristics?

Commentary says: From the third part below, the cause of obstacles (hetu-avarana) is explained. This is the first part, marking the end of the question of the purpose.

Verse says: Without application (aprayoga), in an inappropriate place (asthanayogah), laziness (kausidya), without mindfulness (asmrti), distraction (viksepa), non-awareness (asamprajanya), non-cultivation of wonderful concentration (asamahita).

Commentary says: From the second part below, answering according to the question. There are three parts in it. First, it clarifies that the obstructer (avarana) and the obstructed (avaraneya) are different from each other. The second part, 『Furthermore, these obstacles』 below, uses ten functions (karana) to clarify the meaning of this obstacle. The third part, 『The order of the ten obstructed dharmas』, clarifies the order in which good dharmas, etc., are obstructed. The first part starts below. There are three parts in it. First, five verses are used to list the names of the obstructers. Second, one verse is used to list the names of the obstructed. Finally, half a verse is attributed to the obstructer and the obstructed. Here, five verses are used to list the names of the obstacles, because each verse lists six obstacles separately, so there are thirty in total.

Treatise says: Like this, they are called... what are their characteristics?

Commentary says: Referring to the above text, connecting to the following text, it is the second paragraph.

Verse says: Goodness (kusala), Bodhi (bodhi) acceptance, great compassion (maha-karuna), hearing (sruta), right faith (sraddha), diligence (virya), mindfulness (smrti), wisdom (prajna), cessation and contemplation (samatha-vipassana), mastery (vasita), are called goodness, etc.

Commentary says: Listing the names of the obstructed.

Treatise says: Like this, goodness, etc... how many kinds of obstacles are there?

Commentary says: Referring to what is explained in the verse, asking about the obstructer and the obstructed, how to attribute them, how many of each. Ending the second paragraph, leading to the third paragraph.

Verse says: Like this, the ten kinds of goodness, etc., each...

有前三障。

述曰。類例既同故為總屬。

論曰。善有三障至不如理加行。

述曰。此中善者一切善法。然次第中唯約加行善法宣說。或受持經等。有生得善者。亦名加行故。言非處者。於世業邪學皆名非處。非善處故。於此作加行。不如理故。于善法中。雖作加行。不如理故。大乘姓于小乘作加行故。即無加行等是障非別有障體。下皆隨應準知其相。不能具出。

論曰。菩提三障至末圓滿。

述曰。易知此義。

論曰。發菩提心至心極疲厭性。

述曰。以菩提心攝諸善法。能攝諸善而領受之。以菩提心能資益己亦名攝受。攝受究竟佛果之事亦名攝受。初闕正行與善初障有何別者。此有加行而少分不滿名闕。彼全無名無加行。初二可知。第三障者。雖具姓友。於行善行極生疲厭。不能修行故亦名障。

論曰。有慧者至惡者共住。

述曰。菩薩名有慧者。于了此菩薩之性有三種障。性即真如。菩薩實性故。或即是慧。以菩薩是覺有情故。自此還。

論曰。此中鄙者至名為惡者。

述曰。此簡鄙惡二人差別。初即愚癡。后即約物。謂樂毀。此言於他說他過失。樂壞他善事。他德樂隱。他惡樂同。名為惡者故。論總言樂毀他。義兼同二。

論曰

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：有前三障（指三種障礙）。述曰：因為類別和例子相同，所以總歸為一類。論曰：善有三障，直到不如理加行（不如法理的修行）。述曰：這裡說的『善』是指一切善法。然而在次第中，只就加行善法（通過努力而產生的善法）宣說。或者受持經書等。有生來就有的善，也稱為加行。所說的『非處』，對於世俗的行業和邪惡的學說，都稱為『非處』，因為不是善良的地方。在這些地方進行修行，就是不如理。在善法中，雖然進行修行，但不如理也是一種障礙，例如大乘根性的人在小乘法中修行。即沒有加行等也是障礙，並非另外有障礙的實體。下面的內容都應根據情況類推，瞭解其相狀，不能全部列出。論曰：菩提三障，直到最後不能圓滿。述曰：這個意思容易理解。論曰：發菩提心，直到內心極度疲憊厭倦。述曰：用菩提心來統攝各種善法，能夠統攝各種善法並領受它們。用菩提心能夠資助自己，也稱為攝受。攝受最終的佛果之事，也稱為攝受。最初缺少正確的修行，與善的最初障礙有什麼區別呢？這裡是有加行，但少部分不圓滿，所以稱為缺少。那裡是完全沒有，稱為沒有加行。最初兩種障礙容易理解。第三種障礙是，雖然具備根性和善友，但對於行善卻極度疲憊厭倦，不能修行，所以也稱為障礙。論曰：有慧者，直到與作惡者共同居住。述曰：菩薩稱為『有慧者』。對於瞭解菩薩的本性，有三種障礙。『性』就是真如（事物的真實本性），是菩薩的真實本性。或者『性』就是智慧，因為菩薩是覺悟的有情。從這裡返回。論曰：這裡說的『鄙者』，直到稱為『惡者』。述曰：這裡簡要區分了『鄙者』和『惡者』的差別。『鄙者』就是愚癡，『惡者』是就行為而言，指喜歡詆譭。這裡說的『樂毀』，是指說別人的過失，喜歡破壞別人的善事，別人的德行喜歡隱藏，別人的惡行喜歡附和，稱為『惡者』。所以論中總說喜歡詆譭別人，意思兼顧了這兩種情況。

【English Translation】 English version: There are the first three hindrances. Commentary: Since the categories and examples are the same, they are generally classified together. Treatise: There are three hindrances to goodness, up to non-rational application. Commentary: Here, 'goodness' refers to all good dharmas. However, in the sequence, it is only discussed in relation to the good dharmas of application (good deeds arising from effort). Or, it includes upholding scriptures, etc. Some innate goodness is also called application. 'Non-place' refers to worldly occupations and evil teachings, as they are not good places. Practicing in these places is non-rational. Even in good dharmas, practicing non-rationally is a hindrance, such as someone with Mahayana (Great Vehicle) potential practicing in Hinayana (Small Vehicle). The absence of application is also a hindrance, not a separate entity. The following should be understood accordingly, as it is impossible to list everything. Treatise: There are three hindrances to Bodhi (enlightenment), up to the final non-perfection. Commentary: This meaning is easy to understand. Treatise: Arousing the Bodhi mind, up to extreme fatigue and aversion in the mind. Commentary: Using the Bodhi mind to encompass all good dharmas can gather and receive them. Using the Bodhi mind to benefit oneself is also called acceptance. Accepting the ultimate fruit of Buddhahood is also called acceptance. What is the difference between initially lacking correct practice and the initial hindrance to goodness? Here, there is application, but it is partially incomplete, hence called lacking. There, it is completely absent, called no application. The first two hindrances are easy to understand. The third hindrance is that, although one possesses potential and good friends, one is extremely fatigued and averse to practicing good deeds, and cannot practice, hence it is also called a hindrance. Treatise: Those with wisdom, up to dwelling with evildoers. Commentary: Bodhisattvas (enlightenment beings) are called 'those with wisdom'. There are three hindrances to understanding the nature of a Bodhisattva. 'Nature' is Tathata (suchness, the true nature of things), the true nature of a Bodhisattva. Or, 'nature' is wisdom, because a Bodhisattva is a sentient being with awakening. Returning from here. Treatise: Here, 'despicable' refers to, up to being called 'evil'. Commentary: This briefly distinguishes the difference between 'despicable' and 'evil'. 'Despicable' refers to ignorance, while 'evil' refers to actions, specifically liking to slander. 'Liking to slander' refers to speaking of others' faults, liking to destroy others' good deeds, liking to conceal others' virtues, and liking to agree with others' evil deeds, hence called 'evil'. Therefore, the treatise generally says liking to slander others, which encompasses both meanings.

。無亂有三障至未成熟性。

述曰。顛倒粗重。即四倒七倒見心想倒。煩惱等三障中者。即煩惱業生三種。隨一有餘性者。即於三中隨起一種。有餘二種不起之性。或二雖已無。隨有一種在。是二之餘所有故。名隨一有餘性。能成熟等者。謂慧能成熟能解脫。或此慧能成熟于解脫。未得成熟故未能無亂。此三皆是見道障故。

論曰。障斷滅名無障至放逸性。

述曰。此修道障故。說俱生粗重。即一切修道惑。餘二可知。隨增且說。非不有餘。

論曰。迴向有三障至心下劣性。

述曰。由此三障令心向余不向無上正等菩提。起心下劣樂涅槃故。其文易知。

論曰。不怖有三障至而思義。

述曰。不敬人即佛僧。不敬法即是法。設雖敬法。自無思擇。隨言而解。皆不能無怖怖畏文海故。

論曰。不慳有三障至心無悲愍。

述曰。初慳法。次慳財。后無悲故。成不慳障。

論曰。自在有三障至勝三摩地。

述曰。第一匱者乏也。由昔世時生憎及長。能感匱法之業。所以今時不聞於法。不得自在作大法師。二雖聞法而極勘少。三雖廣聞不修勝定。不得神通雲雨說法得自在故。此上諸障廢立連環相次。如第十障解者。皆應思擇。恐文繁廣不能具述。三乘通

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：沒有混亂有三種障礙，直至未成熟的性質。

註釋：顛倒、粗重，即四顛倒、七顛倒見心想顛倒。煩惱等三種障礙中，即煩惱障、業障、生障三種。隨一有餘的性質，即於三種中，隨便生起一種，有其餘兩種不生起的性質。或者兩種雖然已經沒有，隨便有一種存在，是兩種的剩餘所有，所以名為隨一有餘的性質。能夠成熟等等，是說智慧能夠成熟，能夠解脫，或者此智慧能夠成熟于解脫，未得到成熟所以未能沒有混亂。這三種都是見道的障礙。

論：障礙斷滅名為沒有障礙，直至放逸的性質。

註釋：這是修道的障礙，所以說俱生粗重，即一切修道惑。其餘兩種可以知道。隨著增長且說，並非沒有剩餘。

論：迴向有三種障礙，直至心下劣的性質。

註釋：由此三種障礙，使心向于其他，不向于無上正等菩提（Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi，無上正等正覺）。生起心下劣，樂於涅槃（Nirvana，寂滅）的緣故。文句容易理解。

論：不怖畏有三種障礙，直至而思考意義。

註釋：不尊敬人，即佛（Buddha，覺者）、僧（Sangha，僧團）。不尊敬法，即是佛法（Dharma，佛法）。假設即使尊敬佛法，自己沒有思擇，隨著言語而理解，都不能沒有怖畏，怖畏佛法文句的深奧廣大。

論：不慳吝有三種障礙，直至心中沒有悲憫。

註釋：最初慳吝佛法，其次慳吝錢財，最後沒有悲心，成為不慳吝的障礙。

論：自在有三種障礙，直至殊勝的三摩地（Samadhi，禪定）。

註釋：第一種匱乏，是缺乏的意思。由於過去世時產生憎恨以及增長，能夠感得匱乏佛法的業，所以現在聽不到佛法，不能自在地作為大法師。第二種即使聽到佛法而極其稀少。第三種即使廣泛聽聞佛法，不修習殊勝的禪定，不能得到神通雲雨說法，得到自在的緣故。以上各種障礙，廢立連環相次。如第十種障礙的解釋，都應該思考選擇。恐怕文字繁多廣大，不能全部敘述。三乘（Triyana，三種乘，即聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘）共通。

【English Translation】 English version: There are three obstacles to non-confusion, up to the nature of immaturity.

Commentary: Inversion and coarseness refer to the four inversions, the seven inversions of seeing, mind, and thought. Among the three obstacles of afflictions, etc., are the three types of affliction obstacle, karma obstacle, and birth obstacle. The nature of 'remaining in one' means that among the three types, one arises, and the other two do not. Or, although two may be gone, one remains, which is the remainder of the two, hence the name 'remaining in one'. 'Able to mature, etc.' means that wisdom is able to mature and liberate, or this wisdom is able to mature into liberation. Because it has not yet matured, it cannot be without confusion. All three of these are obstacles to the path of seeing.

Treatise: The destruction of obstacles is called no obstacle, up to the nature of recklessness.

Commentary: This is an obstacle to the path of cultivation, hence the saying 'coarseness born together', which refers to all delusions on the path of cultivation. The other two are knowable. It is said to increase, but it is not without remainder.

Treatise: Dedication has three obstacles, up to the nature of inferiority of mind.

Commentary: Because of these three obstacles, the mind turns to others and not to Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi (無上正等菩提, unsurpassed, complete and perfect enlightenment). Because of the inferior mind that arises and delights in Nirvana (涅槃, liberation), the text is easy to understand.

Treatise: Not being afraid has three obstacles, up to thinking about the meaning.

Commentary: Not respecting people means not respecting the Buddha (佛, the awakened one) and the Sangha (僧, the monastic community). Not respecting the Dharma (法, the teachings) means not respecting the Dharma. Even if one respects the Dharma, if one does not reflect on it oneself, and understands it according to the words, one cannot be without fear, fearing the vastness of the Dharma.

Treatise: Not being stingy has three obstacles, up to having no compassion in the heart.

Commentary: First, being stingy with the Dharma, then being stingy with wealth, and finally having no compassion, which becomes an obstacle to not being stingy.

Treatise: Freedom has three obstacles, up to the supreme Samadhi (三摩地, meditative absorption).

Commentary: The first deficiency means lacking. Because of the hatred and growth generated in past lives, one can feel the karma of lacking the Dharma, so one cannot hear the Dharma now, and cannot freely act as a great Dharma master. The second is that even if one hears the Dharma, it is extremely rare. The third is that even if one hears the Dharma widely, one does not cultivate supreme Samadhi, and cannot obtain supernatural powers to preach the Dharma like clouds and rain, and thus obtain freedom. The establishment and connection of the above obstacles are sequential. As for the explanation of the tenth obstacle, one should all think and choose. I am afraid that the text is too extensive and cannot be fully described. Common to the Three Vehicles (三乘, the three vehicles: Sravakayana, Pratyekabuddhayana, and Bodhisattvayana).

局。位次所在。生起先後。不增不減。皆如下釋。

論曰。複次如是至應知此名。

述曰。即明障中。第二大段約十因解也。于中有二。初舉余處所明十因。後於前下依彼論十因之名以釋之。于善等十法。十能作義。此中所言隨余義中有十能作者。此三十障于善等中。隨余經論所明義中。有十能作因義。即是對法第四卷等。即依彼十能作義。應知此處十因之名。謂名同彼而義望異。然此能作皆增上緣。所望遠故。舊論此文極難信解。

論曰。十能作者至於眼識等。

述曰。眼等是能作因。識等是果。然對法說生起因者。謂識和合望識。舉所生眼等果。取和合識等因。此中舉因體亦無違也。

論曰。二安住能作至如光明于諸色。

述曰。然對法說。如燈于眾色。此處望寬。余文易解。

論曰。五變壞能作至成镮釧等。

述曰。對法說如工巧智于金銀等。此中望假者故說金師。彼望實法言工巧智。依假假者。實實智。故亦不相違。

論曰。八信解能作至如因於宗。

述曰。雖火與宗無別如煙于因不殊。然煙望生解火之智故。名信解能作。以因望所成之義故。名顯了能作。雖二義齊。以所差別分二因也。

論曰。十至得能作至於涅槃等。

述曰

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：『局。位次所在。生起先後。不增不減。皆如下釋。』

『論曰。複次如是至應知此名。』

『述曰。即明障中。第二大段約十因解也。于中有二。初舉余處所明十因。後於前下依彼論十因之名以釋之。于善等十法。十能作義。此中所言隨余義中有十能作者。此三十障于善等中。隨余經論所明義中。有十能作因義。即是對法第四卷等。即依彼十能作義。應知此處十因之名。謂名同彼而義望異。然此能作皆增上緣。所望遠故。舊論此文極難信解。』

『論曰。十能作者至於眼識等。』

『述曰。眼等是能作因。識等是果。然對法說生起因者。謂識和合望識。舉所生眼等果。取和合識等因。此中舉因體亦無違也。』

『論曰。二安住能作至如光明于諸色。』

『述曰。然對法說。如燈于眾色。此處望寬。余文易解。』

『論曰。五變壞能作至成镮釧等。』

『述曰。對法說如工巧智于金銀等。此中望假者故說金師。彼望實法言工巧智。依假假者。實實智。故亦不相違。』

『論曰。八信解能作至如因於宗。』

『述曰。雖火與宗無別如煙于因不殊。然煙望生解火之智故。名信解能作。以因望所成之義故。名顯了能作。雖二義齊。以所差別分二因也。』

『論曰。十至得能作至於涅槃（Nirvana）等。』

『述曰』

【English Translation】 English version: 'Section. The location of positions. The order of arising. Neither increasing nor decreasing. All are explained below.'

'Treatise says: Furthermore, thus, up to 'should know this name'.'

'Commentary says: This explains the obstructions, the second major section, based on the ten causes. Within this, there are two parts. First, it cites the ten causes explained elsewhere. Then, based on the names of the ten causes in that treatise, it explains them in relation to the previous section. Regarding the ten dharmas such as goodness, there are ten ways of being able to act. What is said here is that among the remaining meanings, there are ten ways of being able to act. These thirty obstructions, in relation to goodness and so on, within the meanings explained in other sutras and treatises, there are ten meanings of being able to act as causes. This refers to the fourth volume of the Abhidharma, etc. Based on those ten meanings of being able to act, one should know the names of the ten causes here. The names are the same as those, but the meanings are different in terms of what they refer to. However, all these 'able to act' are dominant conditions (Adhipati-pratyaya), because what is referred to is distant. The old treatise is extremely difficult to understand.'

'Treatise says: The ten 'able to act' extend to eye consciousness, etc.'

'Commentary says: The eye, etc., are the 'able to act' causes. Consciousness, etc., are the results. However, the Abhidharma speaks of the causes of arising as consciousness combining with consciousness. It cites the resulting eye, etc., as the result, and takes the combining consciousness, etc., as the cause. There is no contradiction in citing the substance of the cause here.'

'Treatise says: Two, the 'abiding able to act' extends to like light upon various colors.'

'Commentary says: However, the Abhidharma says, 'like a lamp upon various colors.' Here, the scope is broader. The remaining text is easy to understand.'

'Treatise says: Five, the 'transforming able to act' extends to becoming bracelets, etc.'

'Commentary says: The Abhidharma says, 'like skillful intelligence upon gold and silver, etc.' Here, it speaks of a goldsmith because it refers to what is fabricated. There, it speaks of skillful intelligence because it refers to real dharmas. Relying on the fabricated, there is real intelligence. Therefore, there is no contradiction.'

'Treatise says: Eight, the 'belief and understanding able to act' extends to like a reason upon a proposition.'

'Commentary says: Although fire and a proposition are not different, like smoke is not different from a reason. However, because smoke gives rise to the wisdom of understanding fire, it is called the 'belief and understanding able to act'. Because a reason refers to the meaning of what is accomplished, it is called the 'manifesting able to act'. Although the two meanings are the same, they are divided into two causes based on what is differentiated.'

'Treatise says: Ten, the 'attaining able to act' extends to Nirvana (Nirvana), etc.'

'Commentary says:'

。對法名等至能作。然非是定名為等至。以緣涅槃義故名至得。慧至於滅得此涅槃故。彼論通約總聚諸法故名等至。平等至境故。

論曰。依如是義至於識等所作。

述曰。雜集論等說十能作而不見頌。今者所說或引余文。或天親自說。舊說之都無二頌。於二頌中。初之一頌烈能作名。第二一頌出能作體果。于烈名中。初一句舉數下三句烈名。出能作體果中。上三句出能作體。下一句出所得果。識因者即根等。聖道等者類非一也。余文易知。

論曰。于善等障應知亦然。

述曰。即是第二依彼論十能作名。以釋諸障作用。于中有二。初結同彼。二別解義。此初也。

論曰。一生起障至應生起故。

述曰。名因同餘論之因。而義異也。其心易知。

論曰。二安住障至不可動故。

述曰。以大菩提可安住法不可動故。

論曰。三任持障至能任持。

述曰。以菩提心廣能任持一切佛法功德福智。亦能攝受多種善法及有情故。

論曰。四照了障至應照了故。

述曰。以諸菩薩名有慧者故。性即菩薩之自體也。以慧照知一切法故。

論曰。五變壞障至名變壞故。

述曰。即是見道能除亂故。令障變壞故。名變壞。或能變壞亦名變壞。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：對於『等至』（Samāpatti，禪定）這個法名，是可以施加能作的。然而，『等至』並非是固定的名稱，因為其所緣是涅槃的意義，所以稱為『至得』，即智慧到達寂滅而證得涅槃的緣故。彼論（指《雜集論》）是通盤概括總聚諸法，所以名為『等至』，意為平等地到達境界。

論曰：依照這樣的意義，可以施加於識等所作。

述曰：《雜集論》等論述了十種能作，但沒有頌文。現在所說的，或許是引用其他經文，或許是彌勒菩薩親自所說。舊說中完全沒有這兩個頌。在這兩個頌中，第一個頌列出能作的名稱，第二個頌闡述能作的體性和果報。在列出名稱的頌中，第一句是舉出總數，下面三句是列出名稱。在闡述體性和果報的頌中，上面三句闡述能作的體性，下面一句闡述所獲得的果報。『識因』指的就是根等。『聖道等』是指類似的，不止一種。其餘的文句容易理解。

論曰：對於善等障礙，應當知道也是如此。

述曰：這就是第二個，依據《雜集論》的十種能作的名稱，來解釋各種障礙的作用。其中有兩部分，首先是總結與彼論相同，其次是分別解釋意義。這是第一部分。

論曰：一生起障，乃至應當生起故。

述曰：名稱的『因』與其餘論典中的『因』相同，但意義不同。其中的道理容易理解。

論曰：二安住障，乃至不可動故。

述曰：因為大菩提是可以安住的法，所以不可動搖。

論曰：三任持障，乃至能任持。

述曰：因為菩提心廣大，能夠任持一切佛法功德福智，也能攝受多種善法及有情眾生。

論曰：四照了障，乃至應當照了故。

述曰：因為諸位菩薩被稱為有智慧的人。『性』即是菩薩的自體。因為以智慧照知一切法。

論曰：五變壞障，乃至名變壞故。

述曰：這就是見道能夠去除錯亂的緣故，使障礙變壞的緣故，所以名為『變壞』。或者說，能夠變壞，也名為『變壞』。

【English Translation】 English version: Regarding the term 'Samāpatti' (等至, meditative absorption), it is possible to apply 'able to do' (能作). However, 'Samāpatti' is not a fixed name, because what it focuses on is the meaning of Nirvana, therefore it is called 'attaining to' (至得), meaning that wisdom reaches cessation and attains Nirvana. That treatise (referring to the Abhidharmasamuccaya) comprehensively gathers all dharmas, therefore it is called 'Samāpatti', meaning to equally reach the realm.

Treatise says: According to this meaning, it can be applied to what is done by consciousness and so on.

Commentary says: The Abhidharmasamuccaya and other treatises discuss ten 'able to do' but without verses. What is being said now may be quoting other texts, or may be said by Maitreya Bodhisattva himself. The old explanation completely lacked these two verses. In these two verses, the first verse lists the names of 'able to do', and the second verse explains the nature and result of 'able to do'. In the verse listing the names, the first line gives the total number, and the following three lines list the names. In the verse explaining the nature and result, the first three lines explain the nature of 'able to do', and the last line explains the result obtained. 'Cause of consciousness' (識因) refers to the roots and so on. 'Noble path and so on' (聖道等) refers to similar things, not just one. The remaining text is easy to understand.

Treatise says: Regarding obstacles to goodness and so on, it should be known that it is also like this.

Commentary says: This is the second point, based on the ten names of 'able to do' in the Abhidharmasamuccaya, to explain the function of various obstacles. There are two parts, first summarizing that it is the same as that treatise, and second separately explaining the meaning. This is the first part.

Treatise says: One, the obstacle to arising, up to because it should arise.

Commentary says: The 'cause' (因) of the name is the same as the 'cause' in other treatises, but the meaning is different. The reasoning behind it is easy to understand.

Treatise says: Two, the obstacle to abiding, up to because it cannot be moved.

Commentary says: Because great Bodhi is a dharma that can be abided in, therefore it cannot be moved.

Treatise says: Three, the obstacle to upholding, up to able to uphold.

Commentary says: Because the Bodhicitta is vast, it can uphold all the merits, virtues, blessings, and wisdom of the Buddhadharma, and it can also gather many good dharmas and sentient beings.

Treatise says: Four, the obstacle to illumination, up to because it should illuminate.

Commentary says: Because the Bodhisattvas are called those who have wisdom. 'Nature' (性) is the self-nature of the Bodhisattva. Because they illuminate all dharmas with wisdom.

Treatise says: Five, the obstacle to transformation and destruction, up to called transformation and destruction.

Commentary says: This is because the path of seeing (見道) can remove confusion, causing the obstacle to be transformed and destroyed, therefore it is called 'transformation and destruction'. Or, able to transform and destroy is also called 'transformation and destruction'.

論曰。六分離障至離系故。

述曰。即是修道能除障也。令障斷滅或能分離故名分離。

論曰。七轉變障至轉變相故。

述曰。先心向余。今者回向無上菩提。菩提之心故心轉變。

論曰。八信解障至有怖畏故。

述曰。謂由己身信解人法。自能簡擇。便能無怖。名與彼同。所望義別也。

論曰。九顯了障至為他顯了故。

述曰。由重法輕財等。便於財法二皆無慳。悲愍有情。然為他說法。或施財譽等。

論曰。十至得障至自在相故。

述曰。由多聞等業故。於法便得自在。自在成已能至得涅槃。故障此者名至得障。此則障所障不增不減。此上皆應述其障體。恐厭繁廣但舉宏綱。

論曰。所障十法次第義者。

述曰。第三大段明其次第前後門也。即有三乘通局位次所在。舊論脫此以下一段次第之文。今勘多梵本。悉皆具有。

論曰。謂有欲證至先應生起。

述曰。第一善法即生起也。

論曰。勝善根力至無上菩提。

述曰。第二菩提即安住也。

論曰。為令善根至大菩提心。

述曰。第四有慧即照了也。

論曰。如是菩薩至起無亂倒。

述曰。第五無亂即變壞也。

論曰。由見

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本論曰：第六種是分離障，直至斷絕煩惱的束縛。

述曰：這指的是通過修行佛道能夠去除障礙。使障礙斷滅或者能夠分離，因此稱為分離。

論曰：第七種是轉變障，直至轉變心相。

述曰：先前心念傾向於其他事物，現在迴向于無上菩提。因為有了菩提之心，所以心念轉變。

論曰：第八種是信解障，直至產生怖畏。

述曰：這是說由於自身對人與法的信解，能夠自己進行簡別選擇，便能沒有怖畏。名稱與彼相同，所期望的意義不同。

論曰：第九種是顯了障，直至為他人顯現。

述曰：由於看重佛法而輕視財物等，對於財物和佛法二者都沒有慳吝，慈悲憐憫有情眾生。然後為他們說法，或者佈施財物、讚譽等。

論曰：第十種是至得障，直至獲得自在之相。

述曰：由於多聞等行業，對於佛法便能獲得自在。自在成就之後，便能到達涅槃。障礙達到涅槃的，稱為至得障。這種障礙所障礙的事物既不增加也不減少。以上都應該敘述其障礙的本體，但恐怕過於繁瑣冗長，所以只舉出大的綱領。

論曰：所障礙的十法，其次第的意義是什麼？

述曰：第三大段闡明其次第前後之門，即有三乘（Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna, Bodhisattvayāna）的共通與不共通、位次所在。舊論脫漏了以下一段關於次第的文字，現在勘對了許多梵文版本，都完整具備。

論曰：所謂想要證得，首先應該生起。

述曰：第一是善法，也就是生起。

論曰：殊勝的善根力量，直至無上菩提（anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi）。

述曰：第二是菩提，也就是安住。

論曰：爲了使善根增長，直至大菩提心（mahābodhicitta）。

述曰：第四是有慧，也就是照了。

論曰：如此菩薩，直至生起沒有錯亂顛倒。

述曰：第五是無亂，也就是變壞。

論曰：由於見到

【English Translation】 English version Treatise says: The sixth is the Separation Obstruction, up to the separation from bondage.

Commentary says: This refers to the ability to remove obstructions through the practice of the path. Causing the destruction or separation of obstructions, hence it is called Separation.

Treatise says: The seventh is the Transformation Obstruction, up to the transformation of characteristics.

Commentary says: Previously, the mind was directed towards other things; now it turns towards unsurpassed Bodhi (enlightenment). Because of the mind of Bodhi, the mind transforms.

Treatise says: The eighth is the Faith and Understanding Obstruction, up to the arising of fear.

Commentary says: This means that due to one's own faith and understanding of people and Dharma (teachings), one can personally discern and choose, and thus be without fear. The name is the same as that, but the meaning of what is hoped for is different.

Treatise says: The ninth is the Manifestation Obstruction, up to manifesting for others.

Commentary says: Due to valuing the Dharma and devaluing wealth, one is not stingy with either wealth or Dharma, and has compassion for sentient beings. Then, one speaks the Dharma for them, or gives wealth, praise, etc.

Treatise says: The tenth is the Attainment Obstruction, up to the state of being at ease.

Commentary says: Due to activities such as extensive learning, one attains ease in the Dharma. After ease is achieved, one can reach Nirvana (liberation). That which obstructs reaching Nirvana is called the Attainment Obstruction. This obstruction neither increases nor decreases what is obstructed. The essence of the obstructions should all be described above, but fearing excessive detail, only the major outlines are given.

Treatise says: What is the meaning of the order of the ten obstructed Dharmas?

Commentary says: The third major section explains the order of precedence, that is, the common and uncommon aspects of the Three Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna, Bodhisattvayāna), and their respective positions. The old treatise omitted the following section on the order of the text, but now, after comparing many Sanskrit versions, all have it completely.

Treatise says: That which one wishes to attain should first be generated.

Commentary says: The first is good Dharma, which is generation.

Treatise says: The power of superior good roots, up to unsurpassed Bodhi (anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi).

Commentary says: The second is Bodhi, which is abiding.

Treatise says: In order to increase good roots, up to the great Bodhi mind (mahābodhicitta).

Commentary says: The fourth is having wisdom, which is illumination.

Treatise says: Thus, the Bodhisattva, up to arising without confusion or inversion.

Commentary says: The fifth is non-confusion, which is transformation.

Treatise says: Due to seeing

道中至斷一切障。

述曰。第六無障即分離也。

論曰。既斷障已至正等菩提。

述曰。第七回向即轉變也。

論曰。由迴向力至便無怖畏。

述曰。第八不怖即信解也。

論曰。既無怖畏至宣說開示。

述曰。第九不慳即顯了也。

論曰。菩薩如是至皆得自在。

述曰。第十自在即至得也。

論曰。是名善等十義次第。

述曰。即結上也。然準此文。初之四位。從初發心十信以前未入僧祇位。至世第一法已來。或前三在資糧。第四在加行位。第五在見道。第六在初地修道已去至第七地。第七在第八地。諸佛七勸名迴向故。第八在第九地。得智自在故。第九在第十地。得業自在作大神通雨大法雨。第十在如來。於一切法自在故。三乘通局者。此中唯說大乘位次。唯言無上大菩提故。除二乘中。

論曰。雖善等法至諸障差別。

述曰。自下第四大段明覺分等別善法障。于中有二。初釋外伏難。生下論文。二頌曰下依義正解。此即初也。謂有難言。前明善法障。即攝覺分及度地障。更復何須說覺分等名別障耶。為釋此難故。此論云。雖知已攝。而總別異。故須別明。謂善是總。覺分等別。為顯與前總障別故須別顯也。

論頌曰。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本道中至斷一切障。述曰：第六無障即分離也。論曰：既斷障已至正等菩提（Samyak-saṃbodhi，正等覺悟）。述曰：第七回向（Parināmanā，迴向）即轉變也。論曰：由迴向力至便無怖畏。述曰：第八不怖即信解也。論曰：既無怖畏至宣說開示。述曰：第九不慳即顯了也。論曰：菩薩如是至皆得自在。述曰：第十自在即至得也。論曰：是名善等十義次第。述曰：即結上也。然準此文，初之四位，從初發心十信以前未入僧祇位。至世第一法已來。或前三在資糧，第四在加行位。第五在見道。第六在初地修道已去至第七地。第七在第八地。諸佛七勸名迴向故。第八在第九地。得智自在故。第九在第十地。得業自在作大神通雨大法雨。第十在如來。於一切法自在故。三乘通局者。此中唯說大乘位次。唯言無上大菩提故。除二乘中。論曰：雖善等法至諸障差別。述曰：自下第四大段明覺分等別善法障。于中有二。初釋外伏難。生下論文。二頌曰下依義正解。此即初也。謂有難言。前明善法障。即攝覺分及度地障。更復何須說覺分等名別障耶。為釋此難故。此論云。雖知已攝。而總別異。故須別明。謂善是總。覺分等別。為顯與前總障別故須別顯也。論頌曰：

【English Translation】 English version In the path, one reaches the point of severing all obstacles. Commentary: The sixth, 'no obstacle' (nirāvaraṇa), means separation. Treatise: Having severed the obstacles, one attains Samyak-saṃbodhi (正等菩提, Perfect Enlightenment). Commentary: The seventh, 'dedication' (parināmanā), means transformation. Treatise: Through the power of dedication, one becomes free from fear. Commentary: The eighth, 'no fear', means faith and understanding. Treatise: Having no fear, one reaches the point of proclaiming and revealing. Commentary: The ninth, 'no stinginess', means manifestation. Treatise: Bodhisattvas, in this way, attain complete freedom. Commentary: The tenth, 'freedom', means attainment. Treatise: These are the ten meanings of 'good' and so on, in sequence. Commentary: This concludes the above. According to this text, the first four stages, from the initial arising of the mind of enlightenment (bodhicitta) before the ten faiths, have not yet entered the asaṃkhya-kalpa (僧祇, countless eons) position. Up to the 'highest mundane dharma', the first three are in the stage of accumulation (saṃbhāra), and the fourth is in the stage of application (prayoga). The fifth is in the stage of seeing the path (darśana-mārga). The sixth is from the first bhūmi (地, level/ground) of cultivation onwards to the seventh bhūmi. The seventh is in the eighth bhūmi, because the seven exhortations of the Buddhas are called dedication. The eighth is in the ninth bhūmi, because one attains wisdom and freedom. The ninth is in the tenth bhūmi, because one attains karmic freedom and performs great miraculous powers, raining down great dharma rain. The tenth is in the Tathāgata (如來, Thus Come One), because one is free in all dharmas. Regarding the commonality and particularity of the Three Vehicles, this only speaks of the stages of the Mahāyāna (大乘, Great Vehicle), because it only speaks of unsurpassed great enlightenment. It excludes the Two Vehicles. Treatise: Although the good dharmas and so on reach the distinctions of obstacles... Commentary: From here, the fourth major section explains the separate good dharma obstacles such as the limbs of enlightenment (bodhyaṅga). Within this, there are two parts. The first explains the external refutation of difficulties, giving rise to the following text. The second, 'The verse says below', correctly explains according to the meaning. This is the first part. It means there is a difficulty: the previously explained obstacles to good dharmas already include the limbs of enlightenment and the obstacles to crossing the bhūmis. Why is it necessary to speak of the names of the limbs of enlightenment and so on as separate obstacles? To explain this difficulty, this treatise says: although it is known that they are already included, there is a difference between the general and the specific. Therefore, it is necessary to explain them separately. 'Good' is general, while the limbs of enlightenment and so on are specific. To show the difference from the previous general obstacles, it is necessary to show them separately. Treatise verse says:

于覺分度地有別障應知。

述曰。自下第二依義正解。此有六頌半。于中有二。初半頌總明有別障。后六頌總明三別障。此即初也。

論曰。復于覺分至各有別障。

述曰。總釋頌之大綱。其文易了。

論曰。于菩提分至見粗重過失。

述曰。自下六頌別明三障。復分為三。初一頌明菩提分法障。次有二頌明度障。後有三頌明十地障。此即初也。

論曰。於四念住至不善巧障。

述曰。念住是鄰近釋。言四念住即帶數釋。言善巧者即巧便智。由於事中不善巧故。計身為凈。凈至廣說凈樂常我障體也。由此障念住故。此時觀不凈等。

論曰。於四正斷有懈怠障。

述曰。正體即斷。是持業釋。言四正斷亦帶數釋。體相違故。亦名正勝等。如別抄說。障體即懈怠。

論曰。於四神足至隨減一故。

述曰。神謂神通。神之足者即三摩地。神之足故。是依士釋。四神足者亦帶數義。此欲等四神足助伴故。或時闕一。是神足障。於八斷行亦隨減一。八斷行者。如對法第十及下卷等云。謂欲勤信安正念正知思舍。障體即定障。未斷便令減。或未必是定障。減一即是障。問欲勤心觀神足伴故。減一可為障。其八斷行於神足有何勝力闕一為障。答修習神足必依斷

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：對於覺悟的各個方面，應該知道存在著不同的障礙。

解釋：下面第二部分是根據意義來正確解釋。這裡有六頌半。其中分為兩部分。最初的半頌總括地說明存在不同的障礙。後面的六頌總括地說明三種不同的障礙。這即是最初的半頌。

論：又，對於覺悟的各個方面，各有不同的障礙。

解釋：總括地解釋頌的大綱，文意容易理解。

論：對於菩提分法，會見到粗重的過失。

解釋：下面六頌分別說明三種障礙。又分為三部分。最初一頌說明菩提分法的障礙。其次有兩頌說明度（超越）的障礙。最後有三頌說明十地的障礙。這即是最初的一頌。

論：對於四念住（身念住、受念住、心念住、法念住），存在不善巧的障礙。

解釋：念住是鄰近的解釋。說『四念住』是帶數字的解釋。說『善巧』就是巧妙方便的智慧。由於在事情中不善巧，所以會把身體看作是清凈的。從清凈到廣說清凈、快樂、常、我，都是障礙的本體。由於這種障礙念住的緣故，此時觀察不凈等等。

論：對於四正斷（已生惡令斷、未生惡令不生、未生善令生、已生善令增長），存在懈怠的障礙。

解釋：正斷的本體就是斷，是持業釋。說『四正斷』也是帶數字的解釋。本體和現象是相違背的緣故。也叫做正勝等等，如其他抄本所說。障礙的本體就是懈怠。

論：對於四神足（欲神足、勤神足、心神足、觀神足），因為隨意減少一個的緣故（而產生障礙）。

解釋：神指的是神通。神之足，就是三摩地（Samadhi，禪定）。因為是神之足的緣故，是依士釋。四神足也是帶數字的意義。這是因為欲等四神足是助伴的緣故。或者有時缺少一個，這就是神足的障礙。對於八斷行，也隨意減少一個。八斷行，如《對法》第十卷及下卷等所說，指的是欲、勤、信、安、正念、正知、思、舍。障礙的本體就是定障。沒有斷除就使它減少，或者未必是定障。減少一個就是障礙。問：欲、勤、心、觀是神足的助伴，減少一個可以成為障礙。那麼八斷行對於神足有什麼殊勝的力量，缺少一個就成為障礙呢？答：修習神足必定依靠斷。

【English Translation】 English version: It should be known that there are different obstacles in the aspects of enlightenment.

Commentary: The second part below is the correct explanation according to the meaning. There are six and a half verses here. It is divided into two parts. The first half verse summarizes the different obstacles. The latter six verses summarize the three different obstacles. This is the first half verse.

Treatise: Furthermore, in the aspects of enlightenment, there are different obstacles.

Commentary: Summarizes the outline of the verse, the meaning of the text is easy to understand.

Treatise: Regarding the aspects of Bodhi (Enlightenment), one sees gross faults.

Commentary: The following six verses separately explain the three obstacles. It is further divided into three parts. The first verse explains the obstacles of the Bodhi aspects. The next two verses explain the obstacles of transcendence. The last three verses explain the obstacles of the ten Bhumis (stages of a Bodhisattva). This is the first verse.

Treatise: Regarding the Four Smrtyupasthanas (Four Foundations of Mindfulness: mindfulness of body, sensations, mind, and phenomena), there is the obstacle of unskillfulness.

Commentary: Smrtyupasthana (念住) is a nearby explanation. Saying 'Four Smrtyupasthanas' is a numerical explanation. Saying 'skillful' is skillful and convenient wisdom. Because of unskillfulness in things, one regards the body as pure. From purity to broadly speaking purity, pleasure, permanence, and self are the substance of the obstacle. Because of this obstacle to Smrtyupasthana, at this time one observes impurity, etc.

Treatise: Regarding the Four Samyakprahana (Four Right Exertions: preventing unwholesome states from arising, abandoning unwholesome states that have arisen, arousing wholesome states that have not yet arisen, and maintaining wholesome states that have arisen), there is the obstacle of laziness.

Commentary: The substance of Samyakprahana (正斷) is cutting off, which is a possessive explanation. Saying 'Four Samyakprahana' is also a numerical explanation. The substance and phenomena are contradictory. It is also called Right Victory, etc., as other copies say. The substance of the obstacle is laziness.

Treatise: Regarding the Four Rddhipadas (Four Bases of Supernormal Powers: zeal, effort, mind, and investigation), because of arbitrarily reducing one (an obstacle arises).

Commentary: Rddhi (神) refers to supernormal powers. The foot of Rddhi is Samadhi (三摩地, concentration). Because it is the foot of Rddhi, it is a dependent explanation. The Four Rddhipadas are also numerical in meaning. This is because the four Rddhipadas such as zeal are supporting companions. Or sometimes one is missing, which is the obstacle of Rddhipada. Regarding the Eight Abandoning Factors, one also arbitrarily reduces one. The Eight Abandoning Factors, as the tenth volume of the Abhidharma and the lower volume, etc., say, refer to desire, effort, faith, ease, right mindfulness, right knowledge, thought, and equanimity. The substance of the obstacle is the obstacle of Samadhi (定障). Reducing it before it is cut off, or it may not necessarily be the obstacle of Samadhi. Reducing one is an obstacle. Question: Desire, effort, mind, and observation are companions of Rddhipada, reducing one can become an obstacle. Then what special power do the Eight Abandoning Factors have for Rddhipada that lacking one becomes an obstacle? Answer: Cultivating Rddhipada must rely on cutting off.

行故。闕一時是神足障。此何故八。有四義故。謂加行。攝受。繼屬。對治。加行即欲勤信三。攝受即安一。繼屬即正念正知二。對治即思舍二。如對法第十及下卷說。此上三在何位。此論自有菩提分品。然今且判在資糧位。然未別說在何心中。

論曰。於五根至勝善根障。

述曰。下相釋言。由脫分滿方修五根。諸論說此。在暖頂位。若不種頂解脫圓滿之位。不得五根。乃為障也。或障體即不信等。

論曰。於五力至有羸劣性。

述曰。諸論說此。在忍第一法。即五根時猶障所雜。是下品攝。為五力障。雖闕下品。順抉擇分亦是力障。縱設有時。為障所雜故不說也。或障體同根。

論曰。於七等覺支至所顯示故。

述曰。見道雖有之貪等煩惱及業與果。見為首故但說見障。或見道之所治故名見過失。即一切皆是。

論曰。於八聖道支至所顯示故。

述曰。于修道中。雖有見等。粗重通故。不說別見等現行及種子。煩惱所知障皆名粗重故。

論曰。于到彼岸至受用法成熟。

述曰。自下第二明十度障。初一頌明六度果障。后一頌明四度果障。

論曰。此說十種至自性之障。

述曰。顯非自障即是果障返障之也。言之障者顯依士釋。非持業

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本行故。闕一時是神足障。此何故八。有四義故。謂加行（為達到目標所做的努力）。攝受（接受和支援）。繼屬（持續相連）。對治（對抗和克服）。加行即欲（願望）勤（努力）信（信心）三。攝受即安（平靜）一。繼屬即正念（正確的念頭）正知（正確的認知）二。對治即思（思考）舍（放下）二。如對法第十及下卷說。此上三在何位。此論自有菩提分品（關於覺悟的章節）。然今且判在資糧位（積累資糧的階段）。然未別說在何心中。

論曰。於五根（信、精進、念、定、慧五種能力）至勝善根障。

述曰。下相釋言。由脫分滿方修五根。諸論說此。在暖頂位（修行中的階段）。若不種頂解脫圓滿之位。不得五根。乃為障也。或障體即不信等。

論曰。於五力（信、精進、念、定、慧五種力量）至有羸劣性。

述曰。諸論說此。在忍第一法（修行中的階段）。即五根時猶障所雜。是下品攝。為五力障。雖闕下品。順抉擇分（順應決定的部分）亦是力障。縱設有時。為障所雜故不說也。或障體同根。

論曰。於七等覺支（七種覺悟的因素）至所顯示故。

述曰。見道（證悟真理的道路）雖有之貪等煩惱及業與果。見為首故但說見障。或見道之所治故名見過失。即一切皆是。

論曰。於八聖道支（八正道）至所顯示故。

述曰。于修道中。雖有見等。粗重通故。不說別見等現行及種子。煩惱所知障皆名粗重故。

論曰。于到彼岸（到達涅槃的彼岸）至受用法成熟。

述曰。自下第二明十度障。初一頌明六度果障。后一頌明四度果障。

論曰。此說十種至自性之障。

述曰。顯非自障即是果障返障之也。言之障者顯依士釋。非持業

【English Translation】 English version Therefore, lacking one of them is an obstacle to supernatural powers. Why are there eight? Because there are four meanings: namely, application, reception, continuity, and counteraction. Application refers to desire (chanda), effort (virya), and faith (shraddha). Reception refers to tranquility (prasrabdhi). Continuity refers to right mindfulness (samyak-smriti) and right knowledge (samyak-jnana). Counteraction refers to thought (vitarka) and equanimity (upeksha). As explained in the tenth chapter of the Abhidharma and the subsequent volumes. In what stage are these three located? This treatise has its own chapter on the Bodhipaksha (parts of enlightenment), but for now, let's place them in the stage of accumulation (sambhara-marga). However, it doesn't specifically say in what mind they reside.

Treatise says: Obstacles to the five roots (panca-indriya) up to the roots of superior virtue.

Commentary says: The following explains the characteristics. The five roots are cultivated only when the partial liberation is complete. Various treatises say this is in the stage of warmth and peak (ushmagata and murdhana). If one doesn't plant the seeds for the complete liberation of the peak stage, one cannot attain the five roots, and this becomes an obstacle. Or the nature of the obstacle is disbelief, etc.

Treatise says: Obstacles to the five powers (panca-bala) up to having a weak nature.

Commentary says: Various treatises say this is in the first Dharma of forbearance (kshanti). Even during the time of the five roots, it is still mixed with obstacles. It is included in the lower grade and is an obstacle to the five powers. Even if the lower grade is lacking, the part that accords with the decision (anulomiki) is also an obstacle to the powers. Even if it sometimes exists, it is not mentioned because it is mixed with obstacles. Or the nature of the obstacle is the same as the roots.

Treatise says: Obstacles to the seven factors of enlightenment (sapta-bodhyanga) up to what is shown.

Commentary says: Although there are defilements such as greed and karma and its results in the path of seeing (darshana-marga), only the obstacle of seeing is mentioned because seeing is the foremost. Or because it is what the path of seeing overcomes, it is called the fault of seeing. That is, everything is included.

Treatise says: Obstacles to the eightfold noble path (arya-ashtangika-marga) up to what is shown.

Commentary says: In the path of cultivation (bhavana-marga), although there is seeing, etc., it is not mentioned separately because it is coarse and heavy. Both the manifest and the seeds of defilements and the obstacles to knowledge are called coarse and heavy.

Treatise says: Obstacles to reaching the other shore (paramita) up to the maturation of the enjoyment of the Dharma.

Commentary says: From here onwards, the second part explains the obstacles to the ten perfections (dasa-paramita). The first verse explains the obstacles to the fruits of the six perfections. The second verse explains the obstacles to the fruits of the four perfections.

Treatise says: This speaks of the ten kinds up to the obstacles of self-nature.

Commentary says: It shows that what is not a self-obstacle is a fruit-obstacle, a reversed obstacle. The obstacle of speech shows that it depends on the agent. It is not possessive.

釋。性非障故。

論曰。謂于佈施至說善趣障。

述曰。佈施得富得貴。持戒得生善趣。由慳犯戒不得富貴及生善趣。障體即慳及犯戒。

論曰。于安忍至不捨有情障。

述曰。由安忍故攝諸有情。若言忍辱。唯在怨害不通餘二。故言安忍。障體是瞋害。損殺有情故。

論曰。于精進至增功德障。

述曰。由勤策發減過增德。障體即懈怠。

論曰。于靜慮至趣入法障。

述曰。由定起通。令所化生趣入正法。舊論注云四十心位。今言初入佛法。障體即散亂。

論曰。于般若至解脫障。

述曰。由慧故證解脫。障體即愚癡。

論曰。于方便善巧至無窮盡故。

述曰。由此方便智慧。令前六度連連無窮盡未來際利樂含識。以後障體唯是愚癡。以所障法是智慧故。

論曰。于愿波羅蜜多至善法生故。

述曰。由十大愿。愿在所生之處善無間轉故。由大愿攝受能順善法之生。現今世人無大愿攝。故於所在生不順善法。善法不起。非無間轉。

論曰。于力波羅蜜多至非彼伏故。

述曰。由二種力。令所作善皆得決定。能伏于障。非障所伏。是力度能伏障。障不能伏。以此中說是果障故。舊論云。修習力弱故。不能折伏。非

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本釋：自性並非障礙的根源。

論曰：指的是佈施會帶來善報，最終導致善趣的障礙。

述曰：佈施可以獲得財富和尊貴，持戒可以投生到善趣。因為吝嗇和違犯戒律，就無法獲得財富和尊貴，也無法投生到善趣。障礙的本體就是吝嗇和違犯戒律。

論曰：對於安忍，會障礙不捨棄有情眾生。

述曰：通過安忍，可以攝受所有的有情眾生。如果只說忍辱，就只侷限於怨恨和傷害，不能涵蓋其他兩種情況。所以說是安忍。障礙的本體是嗔恨和傷害。因為會損害和殺害有情眾生。

論曰：對於精進，會障礙增長功德。

述曰：通過勤奮努力，可以減少過失，增長功德。障礙的本體就是懈怠。

論曰：對於靜慮（禪定），會障礙趣入佛法。

述曰：通過禪定，可以開啟神通，使所教化眾生趣入正法。舊論的註釋說是四十心位。現在說是初入佛法。障礙的本體就是散亂。

論曰：對於般若（智慧），會障礙解脫。

述曰：通過智慧，可以證得解脫。障礙的本體就是愚癡。

論曰：對於方便善巧，會導致無窮無盡的障礙。

述曰：通過這種方便智慧，使前面的六度（佈施、持戒、安忍、精進、靜慮、般若）能夠連綿不斷地在未來利益和安樂眾生。以後的障礙本體只是愚癡。因為所障礙的法是智慧。

論曰：對於愿波羅蜜多（願力），會導致善法產生障礙。

述曰：通過十大愿，願力在所生之處能夠無間斷地運轉。由於大愿的攝受，能夠順應善法的產生。現在世人沒有大愿的攝受，所以在所生之處不能順應善法，善法不能生起，不能無間斷地運轉。

論曰：對於力波羅蜜多（力量），會導致無法降伏障礙。

述曰：通過兩種力量，使所作的善事都能得到決定，能夠降伏障礙，而不是被障礙所降伏。是力量能夠降伏障礙，障礙不能降伏力量。因為這裡說的是果報的障礙。舊論說，因為修習的力量薄弱，所以不能折伏。

【English Translation】 English version Explanation: Self-nature is not the cause of obstacles.

Treatise says: Refers to giving alms leading to good fortune, ultimately obstructing the path to good realms.

Commentary says: Giving alms can bring wealth and honor, upholding precepts can lead to rebirth in good realms. Due to stinginess and violating precepts, one cannot obtain wealth and honor, nor be reborn in good realms. The essence of the obstacle is stinginess and violating precepts.

Treatise says: Regarding forbearance, it obstructs not abandoning sentient beings.

Commentary says: Through forbearance, one can gather all sentient beings. If only 'patience' is mentioned, it is limited to resentment and harm, not encompassing the other two aspects. Therefore, it is called 'forbearance'. The essence of the obstacle is hatred and harm, because it harms and kills sentient beings.

Treatise says: Regarding diligence, it obstructs increasing merit.

Commentary says: Through diligent effort, one can reduce faults and increase merit. The essence of the obstacle is laziness.

Treatise says: Regarding meditative concentration (dhyana), it obstructs entering the Dharma.

Commentary says: Through meditative concentration, one can awaken supernatural powers, enabling those being taught to enter the correct Dharma. The old treatise commentary says it is the forty stages of mind. Now it is said to be the initial entry into the Buddha-dharma. The essence of the obstacle is distraction.

Treatise says: Regarding prajna (wisdom), it obstructs liberation.

Commentary says: Through wisdom, one can attain liberation. The essence of the obstacle is ignorance.

Treatise says: Regarding skillful means, it leads to endless obstacles.

Commentary says: Through this skillful wisdom, the preceding six perfections (dana, shila, kshanti, virya, dhyana, prajna) can continuously benefit and bring happiness to sentient beings in the future. The essence of the subsequent obstacles is only ignorance, because the Dharma being obstructed is wisdom.

Treatise says: Regarding the vow paramita (power of vows), it leads to the obstruction of the arising of good dharmas.

Commentary says: Through the ten great vows, the power of vows can operate uninterruptedly in the places where one is born. Due to the acceptance of great vows, it can accord with the arising of good dharmas. People in the present world do not have the acceptance of great vows, so they cannot accord with good dharmas in the places where they are born, good dharmas cannot arise, and they cannot operate uninterruptedly.

Treatise says: Regarding the power paramita (strength), it leads to the inability to subdue obstacles.

Commentary says: Through two kinds of strength, all the good deeds done can be determined, able to subdue obstacles, and not be subdued by obstacles. It is the strength that can subdue obstacles, and obstacles cannot subdue strength. Because it is said here that it is the obstacle of karmic retribution. The old treatise says that because the strength of cultivation is weak, it cannot be subdued.

助道故。此文極錯。

論曰。于智波羅蜜多至而覺義故。

述曰。由有智故令自受用法及自成熟。令成熟。或自受用令他成熟。次有智故。不如所聞及他之言而覺相義。即自簡擇而觀義也。或聞之言名聞言。或聞謂耳後。言謂意后。謂意觀文字而取義等。此等障體論無文判。非即十度自體障故。今以義準。能障于富貴乃至成熟法樂。此名障。諸有漏三性之法。此十度義如瑜伽七十八解深密及攝論第七唯識第九等說。

論曰。於十地功德至故說為十障。

述曰。明別障中第三段也。於三頌內。初之二頌明所障法界。第三一頌約所障十別能障十。

論曰。于遍行等至為十地障。

述曰。先釋第三頌。以此所明障體故。望于聲聞等故。言不染無知。

論。謂初地中至平等法性。

述曰。自下明先二頌所障法界。此地證諸法界。一切法空故。得自他平等法性。此地障者。如舊攝論第十卷說凡夫性無明。

論曰。第二地中至相應出離。

述曰。三乘涅槃名為出離。諸此得因名一切行相。三乘之人俱得出離名同出離。此地思惟。我今於三乘能得出離。一切行相皆應遍修治之。總結之云。是為勤修相應出離。是為勤修與出離相應之行也。舊攝論云。此地作如是想。謂

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本助道故。此文極錯。

論曰。于智波羅蜜多（智慧的完美）至而覺義故。

述曰。由有智故令自受用法及自成熟。令成熟。或自受用令他成熟。次有智故。不如所聞及他之言而覺相義。即自簡擇而觀義也。或聞之言名聞言。或聞謂耳後。言謂意后。謂意觀文字而取義等。此等障體論無文判。非即十度自體障故。今以義準。能障于富貴乃至成熟法樂。此名障。諸有漏三性之法。此十度義如瑜伽七十八解深密及攝論第七唯識第九等說。

論曰。於十地功德至故說為十障。

述曰。明別障中第三段也。於三頌內。初之二頌明所障法界。第三一頌約所障十別能障十。

論曰。于遍行等至為十地障。

述曰。先釋第三頌。以此所明障體故。望于聲聞等故。言不染無知。

論。謂初地中至平等法性。

述曰。自下明先二頌所障法界。此地證諸法界。一切法空故。得自他平等法性。此地障者。如舊攝論第十卷說凡夫性無明。

論曰。第二地中至相應出離。

述曰。三乘涅槃名為出離。諸此得因名一切行相。三乘之人俱得出離名同出離。此地思惟。我今於三乘能得出離。一切行相皆應遍修治之。總結之云。是為勤修相應出離。是為勤修與出離相應之行也。舊攝論云。此地作如是想。謂

【English Translation】 English version It is because it helps the path. This text is extremely wrong.

Treatise says: Because it reaches the Perfection of Wisdom (Jnana Paramita) and awakens to the meaning.

Commentary says: Because of having wisdom, it enables oneself to receive and use the Dharma and to mature oneself. To cause maturation. Or to use oneself to cause others to mature. Next, because of having wisdom, one awakens to the meaning of characteristics, not according to what is heard or the words of others. That is, one discerns and observes the meaning oneself. Or the words that are heard are called 'heard words.' Or 'heard' refers to behind the ear. 'Words' refers to behind the mind. It refers to the mind observing the text and grasping the meaning, etc. The treatise does not judge these obstructing entities in the text. It is not that the ten perfections themselves are obstructions. Now, according to the meaning, it can obstruct wealth and nobility, and even the joy of Dharma that matures. This is called an obstruction. All conditioned dharmas of the three natures. The meaning of these ten perfections is as explained in the Yogacarabhumi-sastra, the Samdhinirmocana-sutra, and the seventh chapter of the Abhidharmasamuccaya, the ninth chapter of the Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi-sastra, etc.

Treatise says: Because it reaches the merits of the ten grounds (bhumi), it is said to be the ten obstructions.

Commentary says: This is the third section in explaining the separate obstructions. Within the three verses, the first two verses explain the realm of the obstructed Dharma. The third verse explains the ten separate obstructions and the ten that can obstruct.

Treatise says: Regarding pervasive practices, etc., it is an obstruction to the ten grounds.

Commentary says: First, explain the third verse. Because this explains the entity of the obstruction, it is in relation to the Sravakas, etc. Therefore, it is said to be undefiled ignorance.

Treatise says: It means that in the first ground (prthivi), it reaches the equality of Dharma-nature.

Commentary says: From here on, explain the realm of the obstructed Dharma in the first two verses. This ground realizes all Dharma-realms. Because all dharmas are empty, one attains the equality of Dharma-nature between oneself and others. The obstruction of this ground is as explained in the old Abhidharmasamuccaya, volume ten, which says it is the ignorance of the nature of ordinary beings.

Treatise says: In the second ground (vimala), it reaches corresponding liberation.

Commentary says: The Nirvana of the three vehicles is called liberation. All the causes for attaining this are called all aspects of practice. The liberation attained by the people of the three vehicles is called the same liberation. This ground contemplates: 'Now, I can attain liberation in the three vehicles. All aspects of practice should be universally cultivated and purified.' To summarize, it is called diligently cultivating corresponding liberation. It is diligently cultivating practices that correspond to liberation. The old Abhidharmasamuccaya says: 'In this ground, one thinks like this, saying'

三乘人有三行差別。迷一乘理故稱無明。又釋。一切眾生所行之善。無非菩薩大清凈方便。何以故。清凈既一。未至大清凈位。無住義故。若悉應同歸菩薩大道。云何修方便不修正道。未入此地。即無此智故稱無明。

論曰。第三地中至不以為難。

述曰。舊攝論云。心遲苦無明聞思修妄失無明是此地障。未至智根位。為遲得菩薩妙定名苦。以障根及修故稱無明。障聞持等不得成熟。令所聞思修有妄失。故稱無明。此皆人語增本論文。

論曰。第四地中至亦皆轉滅。

述曰。無性攝論。契經等法愛斷故不計我所。觀此真如非自非他所攝。名無攝義。前地斷定愛。此地斷法貪及我□□。廣如佛地論等解。舊攝論云。微細煩惱共生身見等無明為此地障。煩惱行者法執。分別種子為體。生住滅不停故名行。此種為身見因。亦即是身見以是法分別種類故。此最下品等。乃至廣說。此皆人語非本論文。

論曰。第五地中至平等凈心。

述曰。無性攝論云。謂了知此。非如色等相續差別。以諸真如體唯一故。舊攝論云。于下乘般涅槃。是此地障。乃至廣說。十地經第七卷云。以十平等深凈心得入五地。舊中邊云。十種心樂清凈平等。今云。十意樂平等凈心。意樂即以信欲或欲解為體。應言十

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：三乘人（Sānyèngrén，指聲聞乘、緣覺乘和菩薩乘的修行者）有三種不同的修行方式。因為迷惑於一乘（Yīyèng，唯一的成佛之道）的道理，所以稱為無明（wúmíng，ignorance）。另一種解釋是，一切眾生所行的善，無一不是菩薩的大清凈方便（dà qīngjìng fāngbiàn，great pure skillful means）。為什麼這麼說呢？因為清凈的本質是唯一的，在未達到大清凈的境界之前，就還沒有安住的意義。如果都應該歸於菩薩的大道，為什麼修行方便而不修正道呢？因為沒有進入這個境界，就沒有這種智慧，所以稱為無明。

論曰：在第三地（dì sān dì，第三個菩薩階位）中，達到不以為難。

述曰：舊《攝論》（Shèlùn，Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra的簡稱）中說，心遲、苦、無明、聞思修妄失無明是此地的障礙。未達到智根位，因為遲緩而得到菩薩的妙定，稱為苦。因為障礙智根和修行，所以稱為無明。障礙聽聞、憶持等，使之不能成熟，使所聽聞、思考、修行產生虛妄的缺失，所以稱為無明。這些都是人們的說法，增添了原本的論文。

論曰：在第四地（dì sì dì，第四個菩薩階位）中，也都會轉變滅除。

述曰：無性《攝論》（Wúxìng Shèlùn，Asaṅga's commentary on the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra）中說，因為對契經等法的愛斷除，所以不執著為『我所』。觀察此真如（zhēnrú，tathatā），既不是自我的，也不是他者所擁有的，稱為無攝義。前一地斷除對定的愛著，這一地斷除對法的貪婪以及我所。詳細的解釋如同《佛地論》（Fódìlùn，Buddhabhūmi-sūtra-śāstra）等。舊《攝論》中說，微細的煩惱和共生身見等無明是此地的障礙。煩惱行者的法執，以分別種子為體。生、住、滅不停留，所以稱為行。這種子是身見的因，也就是身見，因為是法分別的種類。這是最下品等等，乃至廣說。這些都是人們的說法，不是原本的論文。

論曰：在第五地（dì wǔ dì，第五個菩薩階位）中，達到平等凈心。

述曰：無性《攝論》中說，就是了知此真如並非如色等相續的差別，因為諸真如的本體是唯一的。舊《攝論》中說，對於下乘的般涅槃（bō nièpán，parinirvana）是此地的障礙，乃至廣說。《十地經》（Shí Dì Jīng，Daśabhūmika Sūtra）第七卷中說，以十種平等深凈心得以進入第五地。舊《中邊》（Zhōng Biān，Madhyāntavibhāga）中說，十種心樂清凈平等。現在說，十意樂平等凈心。意樂就是以信欲或者欲解為體。應該說十...

【English Translation】 English version: The followers of the Three Vehicles (Sānyèngrén, referring to the Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna, and Bodhisattvayāna) have three different practices. Because they are deluded about the principle of the One Vehicle (Yīyèng, the only path to Buddhahood), it is called ignorance (wúmíng). Another explanation is that all the good deeds performed by all sentient beings are none other than the Bodhisattva's great pure skillful means (dà qīngjìng fāngbiàn). Why is this so? Because the essence of purity is unique, and before reaching the state of great purity, there is no meaning of abiding. If all should return to the Bodhisattva's great path, why practice skillful means without correcting the right path? Because one has not entered this state, one does not have this wisdom, so it is called ignorance.

Treatise says: In the Third Ground (dì sān dì, the third Bodhisattva stage), reaching it is not considered difficult.

Commentary says: The old Saṃgraha (Shèlùn, abbreviation of Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra) says that slowness of mind, suffering, ignorance, and the erroneous loss of hearing, thinking, and cultivating are obstacles of this ground. Not reaching the position of the root of wisdom, obtaining the Bodhisattva's wonderful samādhi slowly is called suffering. Because it obstructs the root of wisdom and cultivation, it is called ignorance. Obstructing hearing, memorization, etc., preventing them from maturing, and causing false losses in what is heard, thought, and cultivated, is called ignorance. These are all people's sayings, adding to the original treatise.

Treatise says: In the Fourth Ground (dì sì dì, the fourth Bodhisattva stage), they will all be transformed and extinguished.

Commentary says: Asaṅga's Saṃgraha (Wúxìng Shèlùn, Asaṅga's commentary on the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra) says that because the love for the Dharma of the sūtras is cut off, one does not cling to 'what belongs to me'. Observing this Suchness (zhēnrú, tathatā), which is neither self nor possessed by others, is called the meaning of non-possession. The previous ground cuts off the attachment to samādhi, and this ground cuts off the greed for the Dharma and what belongs to me. Detailed explanations are as in the Buddhabhūmi-sūtra-śāstra (Fódìlùn). The old Saṃgraha says that subtle afflictions and co-arisen self-view, etc., ignorance are obstacles of this ground. The Dharma clinging of the afflicted practitioner takes the seeds of discrimination as its substance. Birth, abiding, and extinction do not stop, so it is called action. This seed is the cause of self-view, which is also self-view, because it is the category of Dharma discrimination. This is the lowest grade, etc., and so on. These are all people's sayings, not the original treatise.

Treatise says: In the Fifth Ground (dì wǔ dì, the fifth Bodhisattva stage), reaching the pure mind of equality.

Commentary says: Asaṅga's Saṃgraha says that it is to know that this Suchness is not like the continuous differences of form, etc., because the essence of all Suchness is unique. The old Saṃgraha says that nirvāṇa (bō nièpán, parinirvana) of the Lower Vehicle is an obstacle of this ground, and so on. The seventh volume of the Daśabhūmika Sūtra (Shí Dì Jīng) says that one can enter the Fifth Ground with ten kinds of equal and profound pure minds. The old Madhyāntavibhāga (Zhōng Biān) says that the ten kinds of joyful minds are pure and equal. Now it says, the pure mind of the ten intentions of joy. The intention of joy takes faith and desire or desire and understanding as its substance. It should say ten...

意樂凈平等。十地論解云。平等深凈心者。于平等中心得清凈。經云。一過去佛平等深凈心二。未來佛。三現在佛。四戒凈。五心凈。六除見疑悔凈。七道非道智凈。八行斷智凈。九思量一切菩提分法上上凈。十化度一切眾生凈平等深凈心。彼論解云。是諸佛法及隨順諸佛法。何者。謂初三世佛十力等是佛法。餘七隨順諸佛法。諸佛法因此得成。因戒定智及化眾生。戒即第四凈。定即第五凈。第六第七第八第九是智凈。是中第八行斷智者。思量一切菩提分法。上上轉勝故。教化眾生即是第十。十中前三是果。餘七是因。因中前六是自利。第七利他。廣如彼釋。

論曰。第六地中至無染無凈。

述曰。無性云。謂知此性本無雜染亦無清凈。雜染為先。后可凈故。此既本無染。后那可凈也。舊攝論云。粗相行無明是六地障。乃至廣說。

論曰。第七地中至種種法相中。

述曰。無性云。如契經等種種法別。此不如是。今此解曰。由知法無相故。不以有相行。于契經等種種法相中。觀契經等。為有相也。舊攝論云。微細相行無明為七地障。乃至廣說。如經言。龍王十二緣生者。或生不生。云何生。由俗諦故。云何不生。由真諦故。於十二緣生中。未能離生相住無生相。不得入七地。

論曰。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：意樂凈平等。《十地論》解釋說：『平等深凈心』是指在平等心中獲得清凈。經中說：一、過去佛平等深凈心；二、未來佛；三、現在佛；四、戒凈；五、心凈；六、去除見疑悔凈；七、道非道智凈；八、行斷智凈；九、思量一切菩提分法上上凈；十、化度一切眾生凈平等深凈心。《十地論》解釋說：『這些是諸佛法以及隨順諸佛法。』哪些是呢？指前三項，三世佛（過去佛、未來佛、現在佛）的十力等是佛法，其餘七項隨順諸佛法。諸佛法因此得以成就，因為有戒、定、智以及教化眾生。戒即第四凈，定即第五凈，第六、第七、第八、第九是智凈。其中第八項『行斷智』，是思量一切菩提分法，越來越殊勝的緣故。教化眾生即是第十項。十項中，前三項是果，其餘七項是因。因中，前六項是自利，第七項是利他。詳細內容如《十地論》的解釋。

論中說：第六地中達到無染無凈。

無性（Vasubandhu's commentator）的解釋是：知道此自性本來沒有雜染，也沒有清凈。因為雜染在前，之後才可以清凈。既然此自性本來就沒有雜染，之後怎麼可能清凈呢？舊《攝大乘論》說：粗相行無明是第六地的障礙，等等。

論中說：第七地中達到種種法相中。

無性（Vasubandhu's commentator）的解釋是：如契經等種種法的差別。現在這樣解釋：因為知道法無相的緣故，不以有相來修行，在契經等種種法相中，觀察契經等，是有相的。舊《攝大乘論》說：微細相行無明是第七地的障礙，等等。如經中所說：龍王十二緣生者，或者生或者不生。為什麼生？因為俗諦的緣故。為什麼不生？因為真諦的緣故。在十二緣生中，未能離開生相，安住于無生相，就不能進入第七地。

【English Translation】 English version: 'Intentional Purity and Equality'. The Ten Bhumi Sutra (Dashabhumika Sutra) explains: 'Equal and Profoundly Pure Mind' means attaining purity in the mind of equality. The sutra says: 1. Equal and Profoundly Pure Mind of past Buddhas; 2. Future Buddhas; 3. Present Buddhas; 4. Purity of precepts (Shila); 5. Purity of mind (Citta); 6. Purity of removing views, doubts, and regrets; 7. Purity of wisdom regarding the path and non-path; 8. Purity of wisdom in the cessation of actions; 9. Increasingly superior purity in contemplating all aspects of Bodhi (Enlightenment); 10. Purity of transforming and liberating all sentient beings with an equal and profoundly pure mind. The Ten Bhumi Sutra explains: 'These are the Buddha-dharmas and those that accord with the Buddha-dharmas.' Which are they? The first three, the ten powers of the Buddhas of the three times (past, future, and present), are the Buddha-dharmas, and the remaining seven accord with the Buddha-dharmas. The Buddha-dharmas are thus accomplished because of precepts, concentration, wisdom, and the transformation of sentient beings. Precepts are the fourth purity, concentration is the fifth purity, and the sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth are the purity of wisdom. Among them, the eighth, 'wisdom in the cessation of actions,' is because of contemplating all aspects of Bodhi, becoming increasingly superior. Transforming sentient beings is the tenth. Among the ten, the first three are the result, and the remaining seven are the cause. Among the causes, the first six are for self-benefit, and the seventh is for the benefit of others. The details are as explained in the Ten Bhumi Sutra.

The treatise says: In the sixth Bhumi, one reaches non-defilement and non-purity.

Vasubandhu's commentator explains: It means knowing that this nature originally has neither defilement nor purity. Because defilement comes first, it can be purified later. Since this nature originally has no defilement, how can it be purified later? The old Mahāyānasaṃgraha says: Coarse aspect-acting ignorance is the obstacle of the sixth Bhumi, and so on.

The treatise says: In the seventh Bhumi, one reaches the midst of various dharma-aspects.

Vasubandhu's commentator explains: Such as the differences in various dharmas like the sutras. This is not like that. Now this explains: Because one knows that dharmas are without aspects, one does not practice with aspects. In the midst of various dharma-aspects like the sutras, one observes the sutras, etc., as having aspects. The old Mahāyānasaṃgraha says: Subtle aspect-acting ignorance is the obstacle of the seventh Bhumi, and so on. As the sutra says: The Dragon King's twelve links of dependent origination, either arise or do not arise. How do they arise? Because of conventional truth (Samvriti-satya). How do they not arise? Because of ultimate truth (Paramārtha-satya). In the twelve links of dependent origination, if one cannot leave the aspect of arising and abide in the aspect of non-arising, one cannot enter the seventh Bhumi.

第八地中至有增有減。

述曰。無性云。謂法外無用。所以不增。諸法不增。所以不減。或染法減時此無減。凈法增時此無增。于無生法忍圓滿證之。初地分得未能圓滿。忍者是智。知忍無生法名無生忍。舊攝論云。于無相作功用心無明是八地障。

論曰。有四自在至所依止義。

述曰。將解第九十地各得自在。泛舉殊勝。自在有四。無分別者。不由功用即能入故。余如常釋。

論曰。第八地中至所依止義。

述曰。既烈四名。猶未配地故。云初二自在是前八地。然諸經論皆言八地得二。無性云。於八地相及土皆得自在。隨所求相欲令現前。如其勝解即得現前。名相自在。云謂金銀諸珍寶。云何故此論名無分別自在。十自在中復無此故。而得不言相自在耶。舊本同此。今會解云。由得無分別智故。方于相中而得自在。此從根本因說。以八地中得無功用自利自在。第九地中得利他自在。諸論約果說。故言相自在。亦不相違。即智自在一分攝故名無分別。

論曰。第九地中至無礙解。

述曰。事兼前二故言亦能。無性云。分證得智波羅蜜多。乃至廣說。得無礙解名為自在。仍未圓滿智波羅蜜多。舊攝論云。于眾生利益事不由功用無明是九地障。

論曰。第十地中至有情

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：第八地中，有時會有增加，有時會有減少。

述曰：無性菩薩說：『所謂法外無用，所以不會增加；諸法不增加，所以不會減少。』或者說，染污法減少時，此地不會減少；清凈法增加時，此地不會增加。于無生法忍圓滿地證得。初地分證，未能圓滿。忍者是智，知忍無生法，名為無生忍。舊《攝大乘論》說：『于無相中作功用，用心無明，是第八地的障礙。』

論曰：有四種自在，乃至所依止的意義。

述曰：將要解釋第九地和第十地各自獲得的自在，泛泛地舉出殊勝之處。自在有四種。『無分別者』，因為不通過功用就能進入。其餘的解釋如同通常一樣。

論曰：第八地中，乃至所依止的意義。

述曰：既然列出了四種名稱，但還沒有與各個地相配，所以說『初二自在是前八地』。然而，各種經論都說第八地獲得兩種自在。無性菩薩說：『于第八地的相和國土都得到自在，隨所求的相，想要讓它顯現，如其殊勝的理解，就能得到顯現，名為相自在。』說的是金銀等各種珍寶。為什麼這部論典名為無分別自在？十種自在中又沒有這個，而獲得不說相自在呢？舊譯本也是這樣。現在會通解釋說：由於獲得無分別智的緣故，才于相中得到自在。這是從根本因上說的。以第八地中獲得無功用的自利自在，第九地中獲得利他自在。各種論典從果上說，所以說相自在，也不相違背。即智自在一部分所攝，所以名為無分別。

論曰：第九地中，乃至無礙解。

述曰：事情兼顧前兩種，所以說『亦能』。無性菩薩說：『分證得智波羅蜜多』，乃至廣說。獲得無礙解，名為自在。仍然沒有圓滿智波羅蜜多。舊《攝大乘論》說：『于眾生利益的事情，不通過功用，無明是第九地的障礙。』

論曰：第十地中，乃至有情

【English Translation】 English version: In the eighth Bhumi (ground, stage), there are times of increase and times of decrease.

Commentary: Vasubandhu (founder of the Yogacara school) says: 'So-called no use outside the Dharma (law, teaching), therefore it does not increase; the Dharmas do not increase, therefore it does not decrease.' Or, when defiled Dharmas decrease, this Bhumi does not decrease; when pure Dharmas increase, this Bhumi does not increase. One attains complete realization of the Kshanti (patience, acceptance) of the unoriginated Dharmas. The initial Bhumi partially realizes it, but not completely. Kshanti is wisdom, knowing and accepting the unoriginated Dharmas is called Anutpattika-dharma-kshanti (patience towards the unoriginated nature of reality). The old She Lun (Compendium of Mahayana) says: 'Making effort in the absence of characteristics, using the mind with ignorance, is the obstacle of the eighth Bhumi.'

Treatise: There are four kinds of mastery, up to the meaning of the basis of support.

Commentary: About to explain the mastery each attained in the ninth and tenth Bhumis, generally citing the superior aspects. There are four kinds of mastery. 'Non-discrimination' because one can enter without effort. The rest of the explanation is as usual.

Treatise: In the eighth Bhumi, up to the meaning of the basis of support.

Commentary: Since the four names have been listed, but have not yet been matched with each Bhumi, it is said that 'the first two masteries are the first eight Bhumis'. However, various sutras and treatises all say that the eighth Bhumi attains two masteries. Vasubandhu says: 'In the eighth Bhumi, one attains mastery over both the characteristics and the land, according to the characteristics sought, wanting to make them appear, according to one's superior understanding, they can appear, called mastery over characteristics.' It refers to gold, silver, and various treasures. Why is this treatise called non-discriminating mastery? Among the ten masteries, there is no such thing, and obtaining it does not mean mastery over characteristics? The old translation is the same. Now, the explanation is that because of attaining non-discriminating wisdom, one then attains mastery over characteristics. This is spoken from the root cause. In the eighth Bhumi, one attains effortless self-benefiting mastery, and in the ninth Bhumi, one attains other-benefiting mastery. Various treatises speak from the result, so it is said to be mastery over characteristics, which is not contradictory. It is included in a portion of wisdom mastery, so it is called non-discrimination.

Treatise: In the ninth Bhumi, up to unobstructed eloquence.

Commentary: The matter encompasses the previous two, so it is said 'also able'. Vasubandhu says: 'Partially attaining Prajna-paramita (perfection of wisdom)', and so on. Attaining unobstructed eloquence is called mastery. Still not having perfected Prajna-paramita. The old She Lun says: 'In matters of benefiting sentient beings, without effort, ignorance is the obstacle of the ninth Bhumi.'

Treatise: In the tenth Bhumi, up to sentient beings

事故。

述曰。無性云。謂隨所欲。得身語意業用自在。依五神通。隨自在業。皆能成辦。乃至廣說。舊論云。于眾生法中不得自在無明是十地障。余同無性。此上諸障及地。如舊論第十。十地論第一。新攝論二本俱第七。唯識第九。瑜伽第七十八。解深密等說。

論曰。復略頌至一切障解脫。

述曰。自下第五大段明略二障。此先舉頌。頌中有二。上二句結上所明不過二障。下二句釋此二義攝障盡義。

論曰。由此二種至一切障解脫。

述曰。釋頌大綱。以自佛法此二盡時稱之為佛故。論言許一切諸障皆得解脫故。此二種攝諸障盡。如上所說隨其所應二障所攝。然十地障等皆非現行煩惱障。煩惱種子。雖非是此障粗重亦是。如說二障。三住斷惑滅可一一皆通二障。然具分障等。已如前說。

論曰。前障總義至謂一分障。

述曰。自下大文第三總結前也。或所障有大小。或障體有大小。名大小障。所障為大小。下例稍同。

論曰。加行障至謂平等障。

述曰。初即貪等行。后即等分行。以初猛利。障諸聖法諸加行道。后性平等。但障無間解脫二道。得無為之至得名。至得名障。于加行位猶間起故。以性平等行相不違故。然薄塵行與平等同。

論曰。五

【現代漢語翻譯】事故。

述曰：無性（Asanga's brother）說：『隨其所欲，得身語意業用自在。』依據五神通，隨自在業，皆能成辦。乃至廣說。舊論說：『于眾生法中不得自在，無明是十地障。』其餘與無性相同。此上諸障及地，如舊論第十，《十地論》第一，《新攝論》二本俱第七，《唯識》第九，《瑜伽》第七十八，《解深密經》等說。

論曰：復略頌至一切障解脫。

述曰：自下第五大段，明略二障。此先舉頌。頌中有二。上二句結上所明不過二障。下二句釋此二義攝障盡義。

論曰：由此二種至一切障解脫。

述曰：釋頌大綱。以自佛法此二盡時稱之為佛故。論言許一切諸障皆得解脫故。此二種攝諸障盡。如上所說隨其所應二障所攝。然十地障等皆非現行煩惱障。煩惱種子。雖非是此障粗重亦是。如說二障。三住斷惑滅可一一皆通二障。然具分障等。已如前說。

論曰：前障總義至謂一分障。

述曰：自下大文第三總結前也。或所障有大小。或障體有大小。名大小障。所障為大小。下例稍同。

論曰：加行障至謂平等障。

述曰：初即貪等行。后即等分行。以初猛利。障諸聖法諸加行道。后性平等。但障無間解脫二道。得無為之至得名。至得名障。于加行位猶間起故。以性平等行相不違故。然薄塵行與平等同。

論曰：五

【English Translation】 Accident.

Commentary: Asanga's brother (Vasubandhu) says: 'According to what is desired, one obtains自在 (Skt: Svatantra, self-mastery) in body, speech, and mind. Relying on the five supernormal powers (Skt: Abhijñā), all activities of self-mastery can be accomplished.' And so on. The old treatise says: 'Not obtaining自在 (Skt: Svatantra, self-mastery) in the Dharma of sentient beings, ignorance (Skt: Avidya) is the obstacle of the ten grounds (Skt: Bhumi).' The rest is the same as Vasubandhu. These obstacles and grounds above are as described in the old treatise, tenth chapter; the first chapter of the Dasabhumika Sutra; the seventh chapter of both versions of the Mahayana-samgraha; the ninth chapter of Vijnaptimatrata; the seventy-eighth chapter of Yogacarabhumi; and the Samdhinirmocana Sutra, etc.

Treatise: Again, briefly summarizing, [it leads] to the liberation from all obstacles.

Commentary: From here, the fifth major section explains the two obstacles in brief. This first introduces the summary verse. There are two parts to the verse. The first two lines conclude that what has been explained above is nothing more than the two obstacles. The last two lines explain that these two meanings encompass the meaning of exhausting all obstacles.

Treatise: Because of these two kinds, [it leads] to the liberation from all obstacles.

Commentary: Explaining the outline of the summary verse. Because one is called a Buddha when these two, self and Dharma, are exhausted. The treatise says that all obstacles are allowed to be liberated. These two kinds encompass the exhaustion of all obstacles. As explained above, they are encompassed by the two obstacles as appropriate. However, the obstacles of the ten grounds (Skt: Bhumi), etc., are not currently active afflictive obstacles (Skt: Klesa-avarana). Although the seeds of affliction are not the grossness of this obstacle, they are. As it is said of the two obstacles, the destruction of delusion in the three abodes can all be connected to the two obstacles. However, the obstacles of specific divisions, etc., have already been explained earlier.

Treatise: The general meaning of the former obstacle [leads] to what is called a partial obstacle.

Commentary: From here, the third major section summarizes the previous [discussion]. Or the object of obstruction is large or small. Or the substance of the obstacle is large or small. It is called a large or small obstacle. The object of obstruction is large or small. The following examples are slightly the same.

Treatise: The obstacle of application [leads] to what is called an equal obstacle.

Commentary: The former is the practice of greed, etc. The latter is the practice of equal division. Because the former is fierce, it obstructs all holy Dharmas and all paths of application. The latter is equal in nature, but it only obstructs the two paths of uninterrupted liberation. Obtaining non-action [leads] to obtaining the name. [Leads] to obtaining the name obstacle. Because it still arises intermittently in the position of application. Because the nature is equal and the characteristics do not contradict. However, the practice of thin dust is the same as equality.

Treatise: Five

殊勝障謂取捨生死障。

述曰。捨生死取涅槃。障諸菩薩得無住處。名殊勝障。以上即是第一頌明。

論曰。六正加行障謂九煩惱。

述曰。即九結以此粗利障諸三乘正加行道。

論曰。七因障至十能作障。

述曰。即三十障與善等十為十能作故名因障。以能作者是因義故。如能作因。

論曰。八真實障謂覺分障。

述曰。以入無漏實真道中。唯覺分能入。此覺分之障障入真實。

論曰。九無上凈障謂到彼岸障。

述曰。以十波羅蜜多能得無上菩提。故名無上凈。凈是義惑障。此之障名無上凈障。

論曰。十差別趣障謂十地障。

述曰。此十地是十波羅蜜多差別所趣。由此波羅蜜多差別行位成地十。故障十地障名差別趣障。

論曰。十一攝障謂略二障。

述曰。此最後頌攝前諸障為二故也。然舊論文但有十數。此略攝障。十外別明。今此明上之障總有十一。故不同舊。又此雖攝為十一障。然為段分不過五段。已如前說。不可以此為十一障判上文也。

辯中邊論述記捲上

文安五年戊辰自七月十四日至同八日(紙數六十枚在之)書寫之畢后覽之方光明真言(六反)可被稱名號南無慈悲萬行菩薩六反沙門增專大正藏第

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本殊勝障是指取捨生死之障。述曰：捨棄生死，取證涅槃，障礙諸菩薩證得無住處，名為殊勝障。以上是第一頌的說明。論曰：六正加行障是指九煩惱。述曰：即九結，以其粗重和猛利，障礙三乘行者的正加行道。論曰：七因障至十能作障。述曰：即三十障，與善等十法作為十種能作者，因此名為因障。因為能作者是因的含義，如能作因。論曰：八真實障是指覺分障。述曰：進入無漏真實之道中，唯有覺分才能進入。此覺分之障，障礙進入真實。論曰：九無上凈障是指到彼岸障。述曰：以十波羅蜜多（Dasa-paramita，十種到彼岸的方法）能證得無上菩提（Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi，無上正等正覺），故名無上凈。凈是義惑障。此之障名為無上凈障。論曰：十差別趣障是指十地障。述曰：此十地（Dasa-bhumi，菩薩修行的十個階段）是十波羅蜜多差別所趨向的。由此波羅蜜多的差別行位成就十地。故障礙十地之障，名為差別趣障。論曰：十一攝障是指略二障。述曰：此最後頌將前面的諸障歸納為二障的緣故。然而舊的論文只有十數，此為略攝障，在十外另作說明。現在這裡說明以上的障礙總共有十一種，所以和舊說不同。又此雖歸納為十一種障礙，然而按段落劃分不過五段，已如前述。不可以此十一種障礙來判斷上文。《辯中邊論述記》捲上文安五年戊辰自七月十四日至同八日(紙數六十枚在之)書寫之畢后覽之方光明真言(六反)可被稱名號南無慈悲萬行菩薩六反沙門增專大正藏第

【English Translation】 English version 'Superior Obstruction' refers to the obstruction of taking and abandoning in Samsara (cycle of rebirth). Commentary: Abandoning Samsara and attaining Nirvana (liberation), obstructing all Bodhisattvas from attaining a state of non-abiding, is called 'Superior Obstruction'. The above is the explanation of the first verse. Treatise: 'Six Correct Practices Obstruction' refers to the nine afflictions. Commentary: These are the nine bonds (Nava-bandhana), which, with their coarseness and sharpness, obstruct the correct practices of the three vehicles (Triyana). Treatise: 'Seven Causal Obstruction' to 'Ten Enabling Obstruction'. Commentary: These are the thirty obstructions, with the ten virtues, etc., acting as the ten enablers, hence the name 'Causal Obstruction'. Because the enabler is the meaning of cause, like the enabling cause. Treatise: 'Eight Real Obstruction' refers to the obstruction of the limbs of enlightenment (Bodhyanga). Commentary: Entering the undefiled real path, only the limbs of enlightenment can enter. This obstruction of the limbs of enlightenment obstructs entry into reality. Treatise: 'Nine Supreme Pure Obstruction' refers to the obstruction of reaching the other shore (Paramita). Commentary: Because the ten Paramitas (Dasa-paramita, ten perfections) can attain unsurpassed Bodhi (Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi, perfect enlightenment), it is called 'Supreme Pure'. 'Pure' is the obstruction of meaning and confusion. This obstruction is called 'Supreme Pure Obstruction'. Treatise: 'Ten Differentiated Destination Obstruction' refers to the obstruction of the ten Bhumis (Dasa-bhumi). Commentary: These ten Bhumis (Dasa-bhumi, ten stages of Bodhisattva practice) are the differentiated destinations towards which the ten Paramitas lead. The differentiated practices of these Paramitas accomplish the ten Bhumis. Therefore, the obstruction of the ten Bhumis is called 'Differentiated Destination Obstruction'. Treatise: 'Eleven Comprehensive Obstruction' refers to the abbreviated two obstructions. Commentary: This last verse summarizes the preceding obstructions into two obstructions. However, the old texts only have ten numbers; this is an abbreviated comprehensive obstruction, explained separately outside the ten. Now, this explains that the above obstructions total eleven, so it is different from the old explanation. Also, although this is summarized into eleven obstructions, it is divided into no more than five sections, as mentioned before. One cannot use these eleven obstructions to judge the preceding text. Commentary on the Treatise on Discrimination between the Middle and the Extremes, Volume 1 Written from the 14th day of the 7th month to the 8th day of the same month in the 5th year of Bun'an (60 sheets of paper). After finishing writing, upon reviewing it, the Light Mantra (repeated six times) should be recited, and the name 'Namo Compassionate and Benevolent Bodhisattva of Ten Thousand Practices' should be called six times. Shramana (Buddhist monk) Zēng Zhuān Taisho Tripitaka No.

44 冊 No. 1835 辯中邊論述記

辯中邊論述記卷中

翻經沙門基撰

辯真實品第三

不妄名真。非虛稱實。體即十種。若有若無稱彼法而論故名真實。此品廣釋名辯真實品。雖辯相品已辯三性。前依境說。今說于境起行。而說以三性為依顯餘九真實故。

論曰。已辯其障當說真實。

述曰。此品有三。初結前起后以發論端。二頌曰下當宗正辯。三真實總義略有二種下。攝上所明。總結合解體無增減說十所由。

論頌曰。真實唯有十至皆為除我見。

述曰。此即第二當宗正辯。合於此中有二十三頌。總分為二。初之二頌烈十實名。餘二十一頌別解十實。于中次有一頌辯根本真實。次有一頌半明第二。次有二頌半辯第三。次有二頌明第四。次有二頌辯第五。次有半頌明第六。次有半頌辯第七。次有一頌明第八。次有一頌明第九。次有九頌辯第十真實。此即初也。于中第一句標名舉數。次七句烈十名。然第八句是第十。至下當知。

論曰。應知真實唯有十種。

述曰。釋第一句頌。唯者決定義。如前已釋。

論曰。一根本真實至十善巧真實。

述曰。釋次六句。顯烈真實之名。

論曰。此復十種至十我見故。

述

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本

辯中邊論述記卷中

翻經沙門基撰

辯真實品第三

不妄稱為真，非虛假稱為實。本體即是十種真實。無論存在還是不存在，都依據這些法進行論述，所以稱為真實。此品廣泛解釋，故名『辯真實品』。雖然在『辯相品』中已經辨析了三性（遍計所執性 Parikalpita，依他起性 Paratantra，圓成實性 Parinispanna）。之前是依據所觀境界而說，現在是說對於境界生起修行。並且以三性為依據，來顯明其餘九種真實。論曰：已經辨析了障礙，接下來應當宣說真實。

述曰：此品分為三部分。首先，總結前文，開啟後文，以引出論端。其次，從『頌曰』開始，正式辨析宗義。最後，從『真實總義略有二種』開始，概括總結以上所闡明的內容，總括結合，解釋本體，說明十種真實的原因，不多不少。

論頌曰：真實唯有十，乃至皆為除我見。

述曰：這是第二部分，正式辨析宗義。總共有二十三頌，分為兩部分。最初的兩頌列出十種真實的名目，其餘二十一頌分別解釋這十種真實。其中，依次有一頌辨析根本真實，接著有一頌半闡明第二種真實，再有兩頌半辨析第三種真實，然後有兩頌闡明第四種真實，又有兩頌辨析第五種真實，接著有半頌闡明第六種真實，再有半頌辨析第七種真實，然後有一頌闡明第八種真實，接著有一頌闡明第九種真實，最後有九頌辨析第十種真實。這是第一部分。其中第一句標明名稱，列舉數量。接下來的七句列出十種真實的名目。然而，第八句是第十種真實，到下文自然會明白。論曰：應當知道真實唯有十種。

述曰：解釋第一句頌文。『唯』字是決定義，如前文已經解釋。論曰：一、根本真實，乃至十、善巧真實。

述曰：解釋接下來的六句，顯示列出的真實之名。論曰：這十種真實，乃至爲了去除十種我見的緣故。

【English Translation】 English version

Commentary on the Treatise on Distinguishing the Middle from the Extremes, Volume Middle

Composed by the Sramana (monk) Yijing (Paramārtha)

Chapter Three: Discriminating the Truth

Not falsely named 'true,' not vainly called 'real.' Its essence is the ten kinds of truth. Whether existent or nonexistent, it is named 'truth' because it discusses these dharmas. This chapter extensively explains, hence the name 'Chapter on Discriminating the Truth.' Although the three natures (Parikalpita, Paratantra, Parinispanna) have been discriminated in the 'Chapter on Discriminating Aspects,' the previous discussion was based on the observed realm. Now it speaks of the practice arising from the realm. Moreover, it relies on the three natures to reveal the remaining nine truths. Treatise: Having discriminated the obstacles, we should next explain the truth.

Commentary: This chapter has three parts. First, it concludes the previous and initiates the following, thereby raising the topic. Second, starting with 'Verse,' it formally discriminates the doctrine. Finally, starting with 'The general meaning of truth is roughly of two kinds,' it summarizes what has been explained above, comprehensively combining and explaining the essence, and stating the reasons for the ten truths, neither adding nor subtracting.

Treatise Verse: Truth is only ten, up to all to eliminate self-views.

Commentary: This is the second part, formally discriminating the doctrine. In total, there are twenty-three verses, divided into two parts. The first two verses list the names of the ten truths, and the remaining twenty-one verses separately explain these ten truths. Among them, there is successively one verse discriminating the fundamental truth, then one and a half verses clarifying the second truth, then two and a half verses discriminating the third truth, then two verses clarifying the fourth truth, then two verses discriminating the fifth truth, then half a verse clarifying the sixth truth, then half a verse discriminating the seventh truth, then one verse clarifying the eighth truth, then one verse clarifying the ninth truth, and finally nine verses discriminating the tenth truth. This is the first part. Among them, the first line indicates the name and lists the number. The following seven lines list the names of the ten truths. However, the eighth line is the tenth truth, which will be understood below. Treatise: It should be known that truth is only of ten kinds.

Commentary: Explaining the first line of the verse. 'Only' is a definitive term, as explained previously. Treatise: One, fundamental truth, up to ten, skillful truth.

Commentary: Explaining the following six lines, revealing the names of the listed truths. Treatise: These ten truths, up to for the sake of removing the ten kinds of self-views.

曰。此釋第八句頌。說十善巧所由。

論曰。十善巧者至無為法善巧。

述曰。烈善巧名。舊言勝智。若言善巧。是緣彼智。若言善巧真實。是此智所緣之理。故二別也。謂蘊之善巧。乃至無為法之善巧。依士釋名。善巧之真實亦同此解。根本之真實是事或根本即真實二釋。可知。

論曰。此中雲何根本真實。

述曰。此中別解十實。此即解初。于中先為問答三根本名。於此所說下釋根本體。此即問也。

論曰。謂三自性至三圓成實性。

述曰。此即答也。

論曰。依此建立余真實故。

述曰。此釋根本義。依此立余故。然未釋真實之義。乃釋於此。故次論云。

論曰。於此所說至為真實。

述曰。此問真實之義。生下頌文。然本頌中唯解真實之義。所以今問。不解根本之義。所以長行先釋。以真實義外人有疑。根本之義非外所諍。故不論也。

論頌曰。許於三自性至一有無真實。

述曰。上一句簡不極成。故初言許總標三性。下之三句一一別屬。如文可知。

論曰。即于如是至相常非有。

述曰。三性是總。初性是別。第五轉攝。故論言中。此一許字貫通三性。此即第一先陳性無。以一切時相恒無故。即出體也。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：說：這是解釋第八句頌文，說明十種善巧的由來。

論曰：十善巧是指蘊的善巧，乃至無為法（Nirvana，不生不滅的境界）的善巧。

述曰：『烈善巧』是名稱，舊譯為『勝智』。如果說是『善巧』，是指與該智慧相關的。如果說是『善巧真實』，是指此智慧所緣的真理。因此，兩者有所區別。即蘊的善巧，乃至無為法的善巧，依士釋名。『善巧之真實』也同樣這樣解釋。『根本之真實』是指事物本身，或者『根本』即是『真實』，這兩種解釋都可以理解。

論曰：這裡所說的『根本真實』是什麼？

述曰：這裡分別解釋十種真實。這是解釋的開始，首先問答三種根本的名稱。在下面所說的內容中，解釋根本的體性。這就是提問。

論曰：是指遍計所執性（Parikalpita，虛妄分別的自性），依他起性（Paratantra，因緣和合而生的自性），和圓成實性（Parinispanna，真實圓滿的自性）。

述曰：這是回答。

論曰：因為依此建立其餘的真實。

述曰：這是解釋『根本』的含義，因為依靠這些來建立其餘的真實。然而，還沒有解釋『真實』的含義，所以接下來論述：

論曰：在此所說的三種自性中，什麼是真實？

述曰：這是詢問『真實』的含義，引出下面的頌文。然而，本頌中只解釋了『真實』的含義，所以現在提問。因為沒有解釋『根本』的含義，所以長行先解釋，因為『真實』的含義外人會有疑問，而『根本』的含義並非外人所爭論，所以不討論。

論頌曰：承認在三種自性中，遍計所執性是完全沒有的，依他起性是有和無，圓成實性是唯一有，這就是真實。

述曰：上一句是爲了簡別不極成，所以一開始說『承認』，總標三種自性。下面的三句一一分別對應，如文可知。

論曰：即在這樣的三種自性中，遍計所執性的相，永遠是不存在的。

述曰：三種自性是總說，遍計所執性是別說。第五轉攝，所以論中說，這個『承認』貫通三種自性。這是第一種，先陳述遍計所執性是無的，因為一切時候它的相都是恒常不存在的。這就是顯出它的體性。

【English Translation】 English version: He said: This explains the eighth verse, elucidating the origin of the ten skillful means (善巧, shànqiǎo).

Treatise says: The ten skillful means refer to the skillful means regarding the skandhas (蘊, yùn), up to the skillful means regarding the unconditioned dharma (無為法, wúwéi fǎ) [Nirvana].

Commentary says: 『Lie Shan Qiao』 is the name, formerly translated as 『Superior Wisdom』. If it is said 『skillful means』, it refers to the wisdom related to it. If it is said 『skillful means reality』, it refers to the truth that this wisdom cognizes. Therefore, the two are different. That is, the skillful means regarding the skandhas, up to the skillful means regarding the unconditioned dharma, are explained based on the agent. 『The reality of skillful means』 is also explained in the same way. 『Fundamental reality』 refers to the thing itself, or 『fundamental』 is 『reality』. These two explanations are understandable.

Treatise says: What is the 『fundamental reality』 spoken of here?

Commentary says: Here, the ten realities are explained separately. This is the beginning of the explanation, first asking and answering the names of the three fundamentals. In the content below, the nature of the fundamental is explained. This is the question.

Treatise says: It refers to the imagined nature (遍計所執性, biànjì suǒzhí xìng) [Parikalpita], the dependent nature (依他起性, yī tā qǐ xìng) [Paratantra], and the perfected nature (圓成實性, yuánchéng shí xìng) [Parinispanna].

Commentary says: This is the answer.

Treatise says: Because the remaining realities are established based on these.

Commentary says: This explains the meaning of 『fundamental』, because relying on these, the remaining realities are established. However, the meaning of 『reality』 has not yet been explained, so the following is discussed:

Treatise says: Among the three natures spoken of here, what is reality?

Commentary says: This asks about the meaning of 『reality』, leading to the verse below. However, the verse only explains the meaning of 『reality』, so the question is asked now. Because the meaning of 『fundamental』 has not been explained, the prose explanation comes first, because outsiders may have doubts about the meaning of 『reality』, while the meaning of 『fundamental』 is not disputed by outsiders, so it is not discussed.

Verse says: It is acknowledged that among the three natures, the imagined nature is completely non-existent, the dependent nature is both existent and non-existent, and the perfected nature is uniquely existent. This is reality.

Commentary says: The previous sentence is to distinguish what is not fully established, so it begins by saying 『acknowledge』, generally indicating the three natures. The following three sentences correspond to each one separately, as can be seen in the text.

Treatise says: That is, in these three natures, the characteristic of the imagined nature is always non-existent.

Commentary says: The three natures are a general statement, the imagined nature is a specific statement. The fifth turns and encompasses, so the treatise says that this 『acknowledge』 pervades the three natures. This is the first, first stating that the imagined nature is non-existent, because its characteristic is always non-existent at all times. This reveals its nature.

論曰。唯常非有至無顛倒故。

述曰。此釋真實。謂有問言。此性既言。妄所分別說為真實。豈非妄假。故今論言。由此所執唯常非有。以說為非有。即許為真實。無顛倒故。若說此有不稱于無。可言顛倒。既稱于無。故名真實。

論曰。依他起相有而非真。

述曰。此出體也。體雖非無。仍非真有。言有簡初性。非真簡圓成。初體無故。后真有故。

論曰。唯有非真至有亂性故。

述曰。此釋真實。以依他起有亂識性。非是全無。亦非真有。說稱實故亦名真實。

論曰。圓成實相亦有非有。

述曰。此出體也。有無我故名有。我無故名無。故論說亦有亦無。

論曰。唯有非有至有空性故。

述曰。釋真實。以有性故即有無我。以空故即無有我。故總說言有空性故。能如是知稱實理故亦名真實。釋頌下三句次第配應知。

論曰。云何相真實。

述曰。此問第二真實。生下頌文。

論頌曰。於法數取趣至是名真實相。

述曰。六句頌中。初之三句別配三性。后三句通上三性。謂於法數取趣有增益損減見。知此故不轉。是名真實相。乃至廣說。言數取趣。五道循環無休息義。烈名之中。相即是別。真實是總。先言于相。後言真實。頌中

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：論曰：唯有常性並非實有，因此不會有虛妄顛倒。

述曰：這是對真實性的解釋。如果有人問：『這種自性既然被認為是虛妄分別，並被說成是真實，難道不是虛妄的嗎？』因此，論中說：『由於所執著的常性並非實有，因為被說成是非有，所以可以認為是真實，沒有顛倒。』如果說它有，卻不符合非有的說法，就可以說是顛倒。既然符合非有的說法，所以稱為真實。

論曰：依他起相（Paratantra-svabhava，緣起性）是有，但並非真。

述曰：這是在說明本體。本體雖然不是沒有，但仍然不是真有。說『有』是爲了區別于初性（遍計所執性），說『非真』是爲了區別于圓成實性（Parinispanna-svabhava，圓滿成就性）。初性本體是空無的，後者的本體是真實存在的。

論曰：唯有依他起相，並非真有，因為它具有虛妄的識性。

述曰：這是在解釋真實性。因為依他起相具有虛妄的識性，所以不是完全沒有，也不是真有。因為所說符合實際，所以也稱為真實。

論曰：圓成實相（Parinispanna-svabhava，圓滿成就性）也是既有又非有。

述曰：這是在說明本體。因為有無我（Anatta，非我）的緣故，所以說有；因為我（Atman，真我）不存在的緣故，所以說無。因此，論中說既有又非有。

論曰：唯有圓成實相，既有又非有，因為它具有空性（Sunyata，空性）。

述曰：這是在解釋真實性。因為有自性的緣故，所以有無我；因為是空性的緣故，所以沒有我。因此，總的來說，它具有空性。能夠這樣理解，就是符合真實的道理，所以也稱為真實。下面三句經文的解釋應該依次對應理解。

論曰：什麼是相的真實性？

述曰：這是在詢問第二種真實性。引出下面的頌文。

論頌曰：對於法（Dharma，佛法）、數取趣（Pudgala，補特伽羅）有增益、損減的見解，知道這些就不會再轉變，這就是真實相。乃至廣說。數取趣是指在五道（Gati，輪迴的五個道）中循環往復，沒有止息的意思。在各種名稱中，相是別相，真實是總相。先說于相，后說真實。頌文中

【English Translation】 English version: Treatise: Only the nature of permanence is not truly existent, therefore there is no false inversion.

Commentary: This explains the truth. If someone asks: 'Since this nature is considered false discrimination and is said to be true, isn't it false?' Therefore, the treatise says: 'Because the clung-to nature of permanence is not truly existent, because it is said to be non-existent, it can be considered true, without inversion.' If it is said to be existent but does not conform to the statement of non-existence, it can be said to be inverted. Since it conforms to the statement of non-existence, it is called true.

Treatise: The dependent nature (Paratantra-svabhava) is existent, but not truly so.

Commentary: This explains the substance. Although the substance is not non-existent, it is still not truly existent. Saying 'existent' is to distinguish it from the primary nature (Parikalpita-svabhava), and saying 'not truly' is to distinguish it from the perfectly accomplished nature (Parinispanna-svabhava). The primary nature's substance is empty, while the latter's substance is truly existent.

Treatise: Only the dependent nature is not truly existent, because it has the nature of false consciousness.

Commentary: This explains the truth. Because the dependent nature has the nature of false consciousness, it is not completely non-existent, nor is it truly existent. Because what is said conforms to reality, it is also called true.

Treatise: The perfectly accomplished nature (Parinispanna-svabhava) is both existent and non-existent.

Commentary: This explains the substance. Because there is no self (Anatta), it is said to be existent; because the self (Atman) does not exist, it is said to be non-existent. Therefore, the treatise says it is both existent and non-existent.

Treatise: Only the perfectly accomplished nature is both existent and non-existent, because it has emptiness (Sunyata).

Commentary: This explains the truth. Because it has self-nature, it has no self; because it is emptiness, it has no self. Therefore, generally speaking, it has emptiness. Being able to understand it in this way conforms to the true principle, so it is also called true. The explanation of the following three verses should be understood in corresponding order.

Treatise: What is the truth of characteristics?

Commentary: This is asking about the second kind of truth. It introduces the following verse.

Verse: Regarding Dharma and Pudgala, having views of increase and decrease, knowing these will not transform, this is called the true characteristic. And so on. Pudgala refers to the cycle of rebirth in the five realms (Gati) without cessation. Among the various names, characteristic is the specific aspect, and truth is the general aspect. First, it speaks of characteristics, then it speaks of truth. In the verse

欲出其相。所以先言真實。後言于相。

論曰。於一切法至及損減見。

述曰。補特伽羅即數取趣。不言人者。屬余趣故。執二體有。名增益見。撥二名無或假亦無。名損減見。如攝大乘等。亦有此義。此即正出於此妄生。

論曰。若知此故至自性真實相。

述曰。若知於此我法體無。彼增減見便不轉起。此所知無即是遍計所執實相。

論曰。于諸所取至及損減見。

述曰。護法等云。二取之體依他性攝。即於此上起增減見。安慧等云。二取之體遍計所執。此二所依識自證分是依他起。於此自證起增減見。今言二取。取此所依執體為實名增撥。妄體無名減。此即正出於此妄生。

論曰。若知此故至自性真實相。

述曰。知此妄幻依他之相。彼增減見便不轉起。此所知妄法是依他起真實之相。

論曰。于有非有至及損減見。

述曰。有非有義。即圓成實已如前解。此性之體亦有亦無非無。如相品說。若言定有名增。若言定無名減。此即正出於此妄生。

論曰。若知此故至自體真實相。

述曰。知有非有圓成之性。彼增減見便不轉起。此所知有無名圓成實自性之相。問前根本實體即三性。此相真實三性為體。有何差別。為答此問。

論

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：想要顯現事物的真實面貌，所以先說真實，后說現象。

論曰：對於一切法，乃至增益見和損減見。

述曰：補特伽羅（Pudgala，意為『人』，但此處指代更廣泛的眾生）即數取趣（指眾生在輪迴中不斷經歷生死）。不說是『人』，是因為也包括其他趣的眾生。執著于兩種實體（我與法）的存在，稱為增益見。否定兩種實體（我與法）的存在，或者認為它們只是假有，也否定其存在，稱為損減見。如《攝大乘論》等經論中也有此義。這正是從此妄想產生的。

論曰：如果瞭解這個道理，就能證得自性真實相。

述曰：如果瞭解我法皆無實體，那麼增益見和損減見就不會產生。這種所知之無，就是遍計所執（Parikalpita，虛妄分別）的真實相。

論曰：對於所取之境，乃至增益見和損減見。

述曰：護法（Dharmapala）等人認為，二取（能取與所取）的本體屬於依他性（Paratantra，依他起性）。即於此依他性上產生增益見和損減見。安慧（Sthiramati）等人認為，二取的本體是遍計所執。這二者所依的識的自證分是依他起。於此自證分上產生增益見和損減見。現在所說的二取，是取此所依，執著其本體為實有，稱為增益；否定其虛妄本體的存在，稱為損減。這正是從此妄想產生的。

論曰：如果瞭解這個道理，就能證得自性真實相。

述曰：瞭解這種虛妄如幻的依他之相，那麼增益見和損減見就不會產生。這種所知之妄法，就是依他起的真實之相。

論曰：對於有和非有，乃至增益見和損減見。

述曰：有和非有的含義，即圓成實（Parinispanna，圓滿成就的真實）的道理，已如前文解釋。此性的本體，亦有亦無，非無。如《相品》所說。如果說一定是『有』，就稱為增益；如果說一定是『無』，就稱為損減。這正是從此妄想產生的。

論曰：如果瞭解這個道理，就能證得自體真實相。

述曰：瞭解有非有的圓成實性，那麼增益見和損減見就不會產生。這種所知之有無，就是圓成實自性之相。問：前面的根本實體就是三性（三種自性）。此相真實的三性為體，有什麼差別？爲了回答這個問題。

【English Translation】 English version: To reveal the true nature of things, we first speak of reality, then of phenomena.

Treatise says: Regarding all dharmas, up to the views of addition and subtraction.

Commentary says: Pudgala (person, but here referring to a broader range of beings) is the same as the one who repeatedly takes rebirth (referring to beings constantly experiencing birth and death in samsara). It is not called 'person' because it also includes beings in other realms. Holding that two entities (self and dharma) exist is called the view of addition. Denying the existence of two entities (self and dharma), or considering them merely provisional and also denying their existence, is called the view of subtraction. As in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha and other treatises, this meaning is also found. This is precisely born from this delusion.

Treatise says: If one understands this, one can realize the true nature of self-nature.

Commentary says: If one understands that both self and dharma have no substance, then the views of addition and subtraction will not arise. This known non-existence is the true nature of Parikalpita (imaginary, completely conceptualized).

Treatise says: Regarding the objects of grasping, up to the views of addition and subtraction.

Commentary says: Dharmapala and others say that the substance of the two graspings (grasper and grasped) belongs to Paratantra (other-dependent nature). That is, on this other-dependent nature, the views of addition and subtraction arise. Sthiramati and others say that the substance of the two graspings is Parikalpita. The self-cognition portion of the consciousness on which these two rely is Paratantra. On this self-cognition portion, the views of addition and subtraction arise. The two graspings now spoken of are grasping this basis, clinging to its substance as real, which is called addition; denying the existence of its illusory substance is called subtraction. This is precisely born from this delusion.

Treatise says: If one understands this, one can realize the true nature of self-nature.

Commentary says: Understanding this illusory and dreamlike aspect of other-dependence, then the views of addition and subtraction will not arise. This known illusory dharma is the true nature of other-dependent arising.

Treatise says: Regarding existence and non-existence, up to the views of addition and subtraction.

Commentary says: The meaning of existence and non-existence, that is, the principle of Parinispanna (perfected nature, completely accomplished reality), has been explained earlier. The substance of this nature is both existent and non-existent, not non-existent. As stated in the Chapter on Characteristics. If it is said to be definitely 'existent', it is called addition; if it is said to be definitely 'non-existent', it is called subtraction. This is precisely born from this delusion.

Treatise says: If one understands this, one can realize the true nature of self-nature.

Commentary says: Understanding the perfected nature of existence and non-existence, then the views of addition and subtraction will not arise. This known existence and non-existence is the aspect of the Parinispanna self-nature. Question: The fundamental substance mentioned earlier is the three natures (three self-natures). This aspect is the true nature of the three natures, what is the difference? In order to answer this question.

曰。此于根本至名相真實。

述曰。總論有無名根本實。別離增減二種過失名真實相。故二別也。

論曰。無顛倒真實者至常等四倒。

述曰。將解第三無倒真實。此于其體即常等四。問何故苦諦別名無顛倒真實。余之三諦合名因果。為答此問故。今論云。由此治彼常等四倒。余則不然。不可同準。此約別行。唯苦諦為此之四行。如別抄說。

論曰。云何應知至真實立耶。

述曰。此問生起。

論頌曰。無性與生滅至依根本真實。

述曰。此二行半頌中。初之八句別明四行各三行相。第七八句配屬三性。然空三種第二句中。云無異自性。即是三性。一無。二異性。三自性。余如論釋。文易可知。

論曰。無常三者至位轉變故。

述曰。然今無常通緣三性。故說能緣行有計所執等。實非行通初后性。成唯識說。假通三性。實非通故。又以理準。無常緣三諦。初性非諦收。言緣彼者。通一切心緣無常語。假說為無常行。實非此行收。又以彼性假名無常。下諸行相唯此應悉。

論曰。苦三種者至相合故。

述曰。我法二執是能計心。計心所執亦名為苦。心心所取故。以依他起者。染分者三苦相故。余假實如前說。

論曰。空有三者至為自性故。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：問：這是從根本上來說，還是從名相真實上來說？

答：總的來說，有和無的名是根本真實。分別來說，增益和損減兩種過失稱為真實相。所以這兩種是不同的。

論：『無顛倒真實』是爲了對治常、樂、我、凈四種顛倒。

答：將要解釋第三種『無倒真實』。這在它的本體上就是常、樂、我、凈四種。問：為什麼苦諦單獨稱為『無顛倒真實』，而其餘三諦合稱為『因果』？爲了回答這個問題，所以現在論中說：因為苦諦能對治常、樂、我、凈四種顛倒，其餘三諦則不能，所以不能同樣看待。這是就特別修習來說的，只有苦諦才具有這四種行相，如其他抄本所說。

論：應該如何理解，才能建立真實呢？

答：這是提出的問題。

論頌：無性與生滅，無常及有變，空無異自性，苦逼惱及熱，無我不自在，無凈厭可舍，真如謂法界，凈識依根本真實。

答：這兩行半頌中，最初的八句分別說明四種行相各自的三種行相。第七、八句配屬於三種自性。然而，『空』的三種行相中，第二句說『無異自性』，指的就是三種自性：一、無；二、異性；三、自性。其餘的如論釋，文義容易理解。

論：無常的三種是：生、滅、變，因為有位次的轉變。

答：現在『無常』普遍地緣於三種自性，所以說能緣的行相包括遍計所執等。實際上，行相併非普遍地緣于最初和最後的自性。《成唯識論》說，假立的『無常』普遍地緣於三種自性，但真實的『無常』並非普遍地緣於三種自性。又以理推斷，『無常』緣於三諦，但初性（遍計所執性）不被三諦所攝。說緣於它，是通指一切心緣于『無常』的說法，假說為『無常』行，實際上不被此行所攝。又因為彼性是假名『無常』。以下的各種行相都應該明白這一點。

論：苦的三種是：逼迫、惱亂、和合，因為有眾苦相的聚合。

答：我執和法執是能計的心，所計的心也稱為苦，因為是心和心所取。以依他起性來說，染污的部分有三苦的相。其餘的假和實，如前面所說。

論：空的三種是：無、異、自性，因為沒有自性。

【English Translation】 English version: Question: Does this refer to the fundamental aspect or the true aspect of names and forms?

Answer: Generally speaking, the names of existence and non-existence are fundamentally true. Specifically, the two kinds of faults, addition and subtraction, are called true aspects. Therefore, these two are different.

Treatise: 'Non-inverted truth' is to counteract the four inversions of permanence, pleasure, self, and purity.

Answer: We are about to explain the third 'non-inverted truth'. This, in its essence, is the four: permanence, pleasure, self, and purity. Question: Why is the suffering truth (Dukkha Satya) called 'non-inverted truth' alone, while the other three truths are collectively called 'cause and effect'? To answer this question, the treatise now says: Because the suffering truth can counteract the four inversions of permanence, pleasure, self, and purity, while the other three truths cannot, they cannot be regarded in the same way. This is in terms of special practice; only the suffering truth has these four aspects, as stated in other commentaries.

Treatise: How should we understand in order to establish truth?

Answer: This is the question raised.

Verse: No-nature and arising-ceasing, impermanence and change, emptiness without different self-nature, suffering pressing and afflicting and burning, no-self not free, no-purity repulsive and discardable, Suchness is called Dharmadhatu (realm of reality), pure consciousness relies on fundamental truth.

Answer: In these two and a half verses, the first eight lines separately explain the three aspects of each of the four aspects. The seventh and eighth lines are assigned to the three natures. However, in the three aspects of 'emptiness', the second line says 'without different self-nature', which refers to the three natures: 1. no-nature; 2. other-nature; 3. self-nature. The rest is as explained in the treatise, and the meaning is easy to understand.

Treatise: The three aspects of impermanence are: arising, ceasing, and changing, because there is a change in position.

Answer: Now 'impermanence' universally conditions the three natures, so it is said that the conditioning aspects include the completely conceptualized nature (Parikalpita). In reality, the aspects do not universally condition the initial and final natures. The Consciousness-Only Treatise says that the provisionally established 'impermanence' universally conditions the three natures, but the real 'impermanence' does not universally condition the three natures. Furthermore, reasoning infers that 'impermanence' conditions the three truths, but the initial nature (completely conceptualized nature) is not included in the three truths. Saying that it conditions it refers to all minds conditioning the statement of 'impermanence', falsely saying it is the 'impermanence' aspect, but in reality, it is not included in this aspect. Also, because that nature is a provisional name 'impermanence'. All the following aspects should understand this.

Treatise: The three aspects of suffering are: pressing, afflicting, and aggregation, because there is an aggregation of the aspects of many sufferings.

Answer: The self-grasping and dharma-grasping are the minds that can grasp, and the grasped mind is also called suffering, because it is what the mind and mental factors grasp. In terms of the dependent nature (Paratantra), the defiled part has the aspects of the three sufferings. The rest, whether provisional or real, is as previously stated.

Treatise: The three aspects of emptiness are: no-nature, otherness, and self-nature, because there is no self-nature.

述曰。遍計所執非有名空。依他起性與計所執體相異。故亦說為空。性雖非全無。與彼所執異。無如彼所執。故亦說即空。圓成實性空理攝故。然依他起上如所執無。即圓成實空理。說為依他空。亦假說故。

論曰。無我三者至即以自相說為無我。

述曰。此無我三者。如空三說。然顯揚論具有此等三。不能繁引。如成唯識論第九卷疏。

論曰。如是所說至如前應知。

述曰。四行至依三性各有三種。各有三種。如上所說。然舊論又更繁。覆牒一一出前無常及苦。為頌余。但長行如其次第配屬三性。即四三中。初皆所執。次皆依他。后皆成實。

論曰。因果依他起。

安慧釋云。二取即是遍計所執二取所依識自體分是依他起。二取所依識自體分斷得不生。不生是滅。假名依他起。今言二取意。取所依識之自體圓成實性。謂垢寂二。即擇滅及真如。安慧云。垢寂有二種。一染垢寂。即煩惱障斷謂擇滅。二不染垢寂。即所知障斷謂真如滅。總解云。由垢寂故總得二。謂擇滅及真如或垢寂故得擇滅。或性寂故即真如。總含二種故言垢寂二。然成唯識說。二取滅即是擇滅。今者擇滅本性滅收。二論說別。此中約所依所得。二各別故。所依依他。假名為二取滅。所得屬本性。彼論

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：窺基法師述：遍計所執性並非指完全不存在的空，而是因為依他起性與遍計所執性的體性和現象不同，所以也說它是空。雖然依他起性並非完全沒有，但它與遍計所執性的虛妄不同，沒有像遍計所執性那樣的虛假，所以也說它是空。圓成實性包含在空性的道理中。然而，在依他起性上，如遍計所執性所執著的那樣不存在，這就是圓成實性的空性道理，所以說依他起性是空，這也只是假說。

世親菩薩論：無我、空性、無相這三者，都是以各自的體相來說明無我。

窺基法師述：這無我、空性、無相三者，就像空性的三種說法一樣。然而，《顯揚聖教論》中具有這三種說法，不能在此繁瑣地引用。可以參考《成唯識論》第九卷的疏解。

世親菩薩論：像這樣所說的四行觀法，應該像前面所說的那樣理解。

窺基法師述：四行觀法，依據三自性各有三種。如上面所說。然而，舊論又更加繁瑣，重複地列出前面的無常和苦，作為偈頌的剩餘部分。但長行部分按照次第分別對應三自性，即四種觀法中的前一種都屬於遍計所執性，中間一種都屬於依他起性，后一種都屬於圓成實性。

世親菩薩論：因果是依他起性。

安慧的解釋是：能取和所取（二取）就是遍計所執性，二取所依賴的識的自體分是依他起性。二取所依賴的識的自體分斷滅后不再產生，不產生就是滅。假名安立為依他起性。現在所說的二取，指的是所取所依賴的識的自體，也就是圓成實性，包括垢寂兩種狀態，即擇滅和真如。安慧說：垢寂有兩種，一是染垢寂，即煩惱障斷滅，稱為擇滅；二是不染垢寂，即所知障斷滅，稱為真如滅。總的解釋是：由於垢寂的緣故，總共得到兩種，即擇滅和真如，或者因為染垢寂而得到擇滅，或者因為自性寂靜而得到真如。總共包含兩種，所以說垢寂二。然而，《成唯識論》說，二取滅就是擇滅。現在擇滅歸於本性滅。兩種論典的說法不同，這裡是從所依賴和所得的角度來說，二者是分別的。所依賴的是依他起性，假名為二取滅；所得的屬於本性。彼論（《成唯識論》）。

【English Translation】 English version: Śukadeva said: The parikalpita (imagined nature) is not a non-existent emptiness. Because the paratantra (dependent nature) differs in essence and appearance from the parikalpita, it is also said to be empty. Although the paratantra is not entirely non-existent, it differs from the falsity of the parikalpita; it does not have the falsity of the parikalpita, so it is also said to be empty. The pariniṣpanna (perfected nature) is included within the principle of emptiness. However, on the paratantra, as the parikalpita imagines it to be, it does not exist; this is the emptiness principle of the pariniṣpanna, so the paratantra is said to be empty, but this is only a provisional designation.

Vasubandhu said: The three aspects of non-self (anātman), namely, non-self, emptiness (śūnyatā), and signlessness (animitta), are each described as non-self according to their own characteristics.

Śukadeva said: These three aspects of non-self are like the three ways of speaking about emptiness. However, the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra contains these three, so I will not quote them extensively here. See the commentary on the ninth volume of the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi-śāstra.

Vasubandhu said: The four aspects of contemplation (catuḥ-ākāra) that have been described should be understood as before.

Śukadeva said: The four aspects each have three types according to the three natures, as described above. However, the old commentary is even more verbose, repeatedly listing the preceding impermanence (anitya) and suffering (duḥkha) as the remainder of the verses. But the prose section assigns them to the three natures in order: the first of the four is always the parikalpita, the middle is always the paratantra, and the last is always the pariniṣpanna.

Vasubandhu said: Cause and effect are the paratantra.

Sthiramati explains: The grasper and the grasped (two takings, dvaya-graha) are the parikalpita. The self-nature division of the consciousness (vijñāna) on which the two takings depend is the paratantra. When the self-nature division of the consciousness on which the two takings depend is severed and no longer arises, this non-arising is cessation (nirodha). The provisional name is the paratantra. Now, the two takings refer to the self-nature of the consciousness on which the takings depend, which is the pariniṣpanna, including both the defiled (sa-kleśa) and the purified (vi-kleśa) states, namely, cessation through discrimination (pratisaṃkhyā-nirodha) and suchness (tathatā). Sthiramati says: There are two types of defiled and purified states: one is the defiled purified state, which is the cessation of the afflictive obscurations (kleśāvaraṇa), called cessation through discrimination; the other is the undefiled purified state, which is the cessation of the cognitive obscurations (jñeyāvaraṇa), called the cessation of suchness. The general explanation is: Because of the defiled and purified states, two are obtained in total, namely, cessation through discrimination and suchness, or because of the defiled purified state, cessation through discrimination is obtained, or because of the nature of purification, it is suchness. Because it includes both types in total, it is called the two defiled and purified states. However, the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi-śāstra says that the cessation of the two takings is cessation through discrimination. Now, cessation through discrimination is included in the cessation of the essential nature. The two treatises say different things. Here, it is from the perspective of what is depended upon and what is obtained that the two are separate. What is depended upon is the paratantra, provisionally named the cessation of the two takings; what is obtained belongs to the essential nature. That treatise (the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi-śāstra).

不約所依。但辯所得。假名依他。故分擇滅入二取滅。亦不相違。

論曰。道諦三者至建立道諦。

述曰。初唯非有故但遍知。次唯說染故應知斷。后既為無故須知證。然上所說皆略不言無攝依他。非體無也。

論曰。粗細真實至根本真實。

述曰。將釋第五齣體生文。二皆依士持業。釋名各有四重。如唯識說。然約因果別說四諦。約粗細門說此二諦。俗粗真細故。此中但約無漏法名勝義。漏無漏有為無為安立門辯。世俗以圓成實非世俗世俗類故。假名世俗。據實二論。有漏是世俗。無漏是勝義。虛空擇滅義歸二諦如入三性。

論頌曰。應知世俗諦至無倒二圓實。

述曰。此之二頌初辯世俗。后辯勝義。辯勝義中。第一句辯數。第二句列名。下二句辯此勝義依一根本。即圓成實性。圓成實性中有二。一有為二無為。二皆依之。三性中依一性。二實內兩皆依。

論曰。世俗諦有三至真實建立。

述曰。初性無體唯有假名。名假世俗。第二有為遷流義勝。名行世俗。第三之俗由第二俗所顯了故。亦名世俗而體實非。

論曰。勝義諦亦三至名勝義故。

述曰。無漏觀心名為勝智。如是彼境名為勝義。義是境故。為簡后二勝義名義。勝義第七轉故依士釋名。舊

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：不執著于所依賴的事物，只辯論所獲得的結果。假名是依賴於他而存在的，因此區分和滅除（分擇滅，Pratisaṃkhyanirodha）進入二取滅（對能取和所取的滅除），這並不矛盾。

論曰：道諦的三方面，直至建立道諦。

述曰：首先，因為僅僅是非有，所以只是普遍地瞭解。其次，僅僅是說染污，所以應該知道斷除。最後，既然是無，所以要知道證得。然而，上面所說的都省略了沒有包含所依賴的依他起性（Paratantra），並非本體上沒有。

論曰：粗顯和細微的真實，直至根本真實。

述曰：將要解釋第五個問題，闡述本體產生的文句。這兩個問題都依賴於士釋（依主釋）和持業釋（同格釋）。解釋名稱各有四重含義，如《唯識論》所說。然而，從因果的角度分別說明四諦（Arya-satya），從粗細的角度說明這兩個諦。世俗是粗顯的，真諦是細微的。這裡僅僅從無漏法的角度稱為勝義（Paramārtha）。有漏和無漏、有為和無為，從安立的角度進行辨別。世俗諦（Saṃvṛti-satya）以圓成實性（Pariniṣpanna）不是世俗諦，而是世俗諦的同類。假名世俗諦，根據實際情況進行兩種論述。有漏是世俗諦，無漏是勝義諦。虛空（Ākāśa）和擇滅（Pratisaṃkhyanirodha）的意義歸於二諦，如同進入三自性（Trisvabhāva）一樣。

論頌曰：應該瞭解世俗諦，直至無倒的兩種圓成實性。

述曰：這兩首偈頌，第一首辨別世俗諦，第二首辨別勝義諦。在辨別勝義諦中，第一句辨別數量，第二句列出名稱。下面兩句辨別這個勝義諦依賴於一個根本，即圓成實性。圓成實性中有兩種，一是有為，二是無為，都依賴於它。三自性中依賴於一個自性，兩個實性內部兩者都依賴。

論曰：世俗諦有三種，直至真實建立。

述曰：第一種自性沒有本體，只有假名，名為假名世俗諦。第二種有為法，遷流變化的意義殊勝，名為行世俗諦。第三種世俗諦由第二種世俗諦所顯現，因此也名為世俗諦，但本體實際上不是。

論曰：勝義諦也有三種，直至名為勝義的緣故。

述曰：無漏的觀心名為勝智（Adhiprajñā）。像這樣，它的境界名為勝義。義是境界的緣故。爲了簡別後面的兩種勝義，名為勝義，第七轉依士釋名，舊譯。

【English Translation】 English version: Not clinging to what is relied upon, but only debating what is obtained. Nominal existence (假名, parikalpita) depends on others (依他, paratantra), therefore, distinguishing and extinguishing (分擇滅, Pratisaṃkhyanirodha) entering into the extinction of dualistic grasping (二取滅, the extinction of grasping at the grasper and the grasped) is not contradictory.

Treatise says: The three aspects of the Path Truth (道諦, marga-satya), up to the establishment of the Path Truth.

Commentary says: Firstly, because it is merely non-existence, it is only universally known. Secondly, it only speaks of defilement, so it should be known to be abandoned. Lastly, since it is non-existent, it must be known to be realized. However, what was said above all omits that it does not include the dependent nature (依他起性, paratantra). It is not that the substance does not exist.

Treatise says: Coarse and subtle realities, up to the fundamental reality.

Commentary says: It will explain the fifth question, elaborating on the sentences where the substance arises. Both questions rely on the possessive compound (士釋, ṣaṣṭhī-tatpuruṣa) and appositional compound (持業釋, karmadhāraya). Explaining the names each has four layers of meaning, as explained in the Treatise on Consciousness-only. However, from the perspective of cause and effect, the Four Noble Truths (四諦, arya-satya) are explained separately, and from the perspective of coarse and subtle, these two truths are explained. Conventional truth (俗諦, saṃvṛti-satya) is coarse, and ultimate truth (真諦, paramārtha-satya) is subtle. Here, only from the perspective of unconditioned dharmas (無漏法, anāsrava-dharma) is it called ultimate reality (勝義, paramārtha). Conditioned (有漏, sāsrava) and unconditioned, conditioned and unconditioned, are distinguished from the perspective of establishment. Conventional truth, because the perfectly established nature (圓成實性, pariniṣpanna) is not conventional truth, but is of the same kind as conventional truth, is nominally conventional truth. According to the actual situation, there are two kinds of arguments. Conditioned is conventional truth, and unconditioned is ultimate reality. The meaning of space (虛空, ākāśa) and cessation through discrimination (擇滅, pratisaṃkhyanirodha) belong to the two truths, just like entering the three natures (三自性, trisvabhāva).

Verse says: One should understand conventional truth, up to the two perfectly established realities without inversion.

Commentary says: These two verses, the first distinguishes conventional truth, and the second distinguishes ultimate truth. In distinguishing ultimate truth, the first line distinguishes the number, and the second line lists the names. The following two lines distinguish that this ultimate truth relies on one fundamental, namely the perfectly established nature. There are two kinds of perfectly established nature, one is conditioned, and the other is unconditioned, both rely on it. Among the three natures, it relies on one nature, and within the two realities, both rely on it.

Treatise says: There are three kinds of conventional truth, up to the establishment of reality.

Commentary says: The first nature has no substance, only nominal existence, and is called nominal conventional truth. The second is conditioned dharma, the meaning of change and flow is superior, and is called the conventional truth of action. The third kind of conventional truth is manifested by the second kind of conventional truth, therefore it is also called conventional truth, but the substance is actually not.

Treatise says: There are also three kinds of ultimate truth, up to the reason it is called ultimate reality.

Commentary says: Unconditioned contemplation (無漏觀心, anāsrava-citta) is called superior wisdom (勝智, adhiprajñā). Like this, its object is called ultimate reality. Because 'artha' (義) is the object. In order to distinguish the latter two ultimate realities, it is called ultimate reality, the seventh case ending relies on the possessive compound, old translation.

論言真諦。或言第一義諦。即無此解。

論曰。二得勝義至亦義利故。

述曰。今言義者。即是義利。能順益故。謂此涅槃體是勝果立以勝名。又是義利。故亦名義。亦勝亦義即持業釋。至得所得名得勝義。

論曰。三正行義至為義故。

述曰。智是有為故名為行。異有漏善復立正名。以勝法為義名為勝義。即有財釋。言正行者。為簡前二。唯識但言行勝義無正字。若但言義勝義等。不除上義字等。解此三皆持業。皆除上字。解三釋如前。會蘊等名勝義。如唯識第一抄。

論曰。此三勝義至圓成實立。

述曰。釋頌第七句中依本一三字。

論曰。此圓成實至有差別故。

述曰。釋頌第八句中二圓實三字。

論曰。無為總攝至亦名圓成實。

述曰。釋頌第七句下二字第八句上二字。于有為中但言聖道。道為主故。無漏位中智勝餘故。如言唯識。

論曰。極成實至實立耶。

述曰。梵云悉陀。即是極成義舊曰悉檀。即此名是。然此二真實與后二障所行。如瑜伽三十八等真實義品。共一處明。今以極成等名別故。分二處釋也。為欲解第六真實。出體徴起。

論頌曰。世極成依一理極成依三。

述曰。二句各一如文易知。

論

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本論述關於真諦（Satya，真實不虛的道理）的討論。或者說是第一義諦（Paramārtha-satya，最高的真實），但這樣理解是不全面的。

論中說：二者獲得殊勝的意義，是因為它具有意義和利益。

註釋說：現在所說的『義』，就是指意義和利益，因為它能夠帶來順益。也就是說，涅槃（Nirvana，解脫）的本體是殊勝的果報，因此用『勝』來命名。它又是意義和利益，所以也稱為『義』。『亦勝亦義』是持業釋（Karmadhāraya，一種複合詞的構成方式）。達到所獲得的目標，稱為『得勝義』。

論中說：三者是正行的意義，是爲了獲得意義。

註釋說：智慧是有為法（Saṃskṛta，由因緣和合而生的事物），所以稱為『行』。與有漏的善法不同，又特別立名為『正』。以殊勝的法為意義，稱為『勝義』，這是有財釋（Tatpuruṣa，一種複合詞的構成方式）。說『正行』是爲了區別於前兩者。《唯識論》只說『行勝義』，沒有『正』字。如果只說『義勝義』等，就不能排除上面的『義』字等。解釋這三者都是持業釋，都排除了上面的字。解釋三種解釋方式如前所述。會合蘊等名稱為勝義，如《唯識第一抄》中所述。

論中說：這三種勝義，是依據圓成實性（Pariniṣpanna，究竟真實的自性）而建立的。

註釋說：解釋頌文第七句中的『依本一三』這幾個字。

論中說：這個圓成實性，是因為有差別。

註釋說：解釋頌文第八句中的『二圓實三』這幾個字。

論中說：無為法（Asaṃskṛta，不依賴因緣的事物）總攝一切，也稱為圓成實性。

註釋說：解釋頌文第七句下面的兩個字和第八句上面的兩個字。在有為法中，只說聖道（Ārya-mārga，通往解脫的道路），因為道是主要的。在無漏位（Anāsrava，沒有煩惱的狀態）中，智慧勝過其他，就像說『唯識』一樣。

論中說：極成實性（Pariniṣpanna-satya，完全成就的真實）是真實建立的嗎？

註釋說：梵語是Siddha，就是極成的意思。舊譯為悉檀，就是這個名稱。然而，這兩種真實與後面的兩種障礙所行，如《瑜伽師地論》第三十八等真實義品中共同說明。現在因為極成等名稱不同，所以分為兩處解釋。爲了解釋第六種真實，提出本體並引發討論。

論頌說：世俗極成依於一，道理極成依於三。

註釋說：這兩句各自依據文義，容易理解。

論

【English Translation】 English version A discussion on the ultimate truth (Satya). Or, it could be said to be the highest truth (Paramārtha-satya), but this understanding is not comprehensive.

The treatise states: The two obtain superior meaning because they possess meaning and benefit.

The commentary states: The 'meaning' referred to now is meaning and benefit, because it brings about advantages. That is to say, the essence of Nirvana (liberation) is a superior result, hence it is named 'superior'. It is also meaning and benefit, so it is also called 'meaning'. 'Also superior, also meaning' is a Karmadhāraya compound (a type of compound word formation). Reaching the goal that is obtained is called 'obtaining superior meaning'.

The treatise states: The third is the meaning of right practice, for the sake of obtaining meaning.

The commentary states: Wisdom is conditioned (Saṃskṛta, things arising from causes and conditions), so it is called 'practice'. Different from defiled wholesome dharmas, it is specially named 'right'. Taking the superior dharma as meaning is called 'superior meaning', which is a Tatpuruṣa compound (a type of compound word formation). Saying 'right practice' is to distinguish it from the previous two. The Vijñāptimātratā-śāstra only says 'practice superior meaning', without the word 'right'. If only 'meaning superior meaning' etc. are said, the above word 'meaning' etc. cannot be excluded. Explaining these three are all Karmadhāraya compounds, all excluding the above words. Explaining the three types of explanations is as described before. Combining aggregates etc. is named superior meaning, as described in the first copy of the Vijñāptimātratā-śāstra.

The treatise states: These three superior meanings are established based on the perfected nature (Pariniṣpanna, the ultimate true nature).

The commentary states: Explaining the words 'based on the one three' in the seventh line of the verse.

The treatise states: This perfected nature is because there are differences.

The commentary states: Explaining the words 'two perfected three' in the eighth line of the verse.

The treatise states: The unconditioned (Asaṃskṛta, things not dependent on conditions) encompasses everything and is also called the perfected nature.

The commentary states: Explaining the two words below the seventh line and the two words above the eighth line of the verse. Among conditioned things, only the noble path (Ārya-mārga, the path to liberation) is mentioned, because the path is the main thing. In the undefiled state (Anāsrava, the state without afflictions), wisdom surpasses the others, just like saying 'Vijñapti'.

The treatise states: Is the completely established truth (Pariniṣpanna-satya) truly established?

The commentary states: In Sanskrit, it is Siddha, which means completely established. The old translation is 悉檀 (Xīdán), which is this name. However, these two truths and the two hindrances that are practiced later are explained together in the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra, thirty-eighth, etc., in the chapter on the meaning of truth. Now, because the names such as completely established are different, they are explained in two places. In order to explain the sixth truth, the essence is presented and discussion is initiated.

The verse states: Worldly completely established relies on one, reasoned completely established relies on three.

The commentary states: These two sentences each rely on the meaning of the text, which is easy to understand.

The treatise

曰。若事世間至極成真實。

述曰。若事者指法也。世間者簡聖者也。解世間名。共所安立者。宗所施設也。解極成義。串習者。從無始來數數習也。隨入者。□之言解由串習故。隨彼彼事作彼解也。覺慧所取者。謂共所安立事也。一切世間同執此事者。解真實義。此中意說。謂如一地大。一切世間共所施設。名之為地。此地是無始來串習隨解覺慧所取故。一切世間同執此事。是地非火。乃至廣說餘一切法。今此且舉能造中地所造中色。等餘一切法。皆如理知。此解頌中第一句世極成三字。

論曰。此根本于至所執而立。

述曰。此偈頌中。第一句依一二字。然世間中亦有善心或無記心等。說地非火。非有執者。今此中真道理極成真實所攝。然此理論亦依他起攝。即通二性。此論據一所執分。瑜伽據依他一分故。成唯識會而取之。

論曰。若有理義至極成真實。

述曰。若有理義。即有道理之義。此解道理二字。諸外道等名聰睿者。諸內法等名賢善者。一切異生名尋思者。瑜伽真實義品。雖有多人此三攝盡。此等皆極成義。依於三量四種道理中證成道理。施設此理。建立此理。名為道理極成真實。依三量等解真實義。總解頌中第二句上三字。

論曰。此依根本三真實立。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：問：如果世間之事達到極致，成為真實，那又是什麼呢？答：『若事』指的是法。『世間』是爲了區別于聖者。解釋『世間』這個名稱，就是『共同安立』的事物，是大眾共同施設的。解釋『極致成就』的含義，『串習』是指從無始以來無數次的習慣。『隨入』的意思是，因為串習的緣故，隨著各種事物產生各種理解。『覺慧所取』是指共同安立的事物。『一切世間共同執持此事』，解釋了『真實』的含義。這裡的意思是說，比如一塊土地，一切世間共同施設，稱之為『地』。這塊土地是無始以來串習、隨順理解、覺慧所取的，所以一切世間共同執持此事，認為這是地而不是火，乃至廣泛地說其他一切法。現在這裡暫且舉例能造作的地，所造作的色等，其餘一切法，都應如理了知。這解釋了頌中的第一句『世極成』三個字。論：這根本是依據所執而建立的。述：這偈頌中，第一句依據『一二』二字。然而世間中也有善心或者無記心等，說地不是火，並非沒有執著的人。現在這裡是真正的道理，是極致成就的真實所攝。然而這個理論也屬於依他起性所攝，即通於二性。這個論據是依據所執的一部分。瑜伽論是依據依他起性的一部分，所以《成唯識論》會取用它。論：如果有理義達到極致，成為真實，那又是什麼呢？述：『若有理義』，就是有道理的意義。這解釋了『道理』二字。諸如外道等被稱為『聰睿者』，諸如內法等被稱為『賢善者』，一切異生被稱為『尋思者』。《瑜伽師地論·真實義品》中，雖然有多人，但都被這三者涵蓋殆盡。這些都是極致成就的意義。依據於三量、四種道理中，證明成就道理。施設這個道理，建立這個道理，名為道理極致成就的真實。依據三量等解釋真實的意義。總的解釋了頌中第二句上的三個字。論：這依據根本的三種真實而建立。

【English Translation】 English version:Question: If worldly matters reach their ultimate point and become real, what is that? Answer: 'If matters' refers to dharmas (法, phenomena/teachings). 'Worldly' distinguishes it from the noble ones (聖者, enlightened beings). Explaining the name 'worldly,' it is 'commonly established' things, which are commonly posited by the masses. Explaining the meaning of 'ultimate attainment,' 'habitual practice' (串習, chuanxi) refers to countless habits from beginningless time. 'Following entry' means that because of habitual practice, various understandings arise along with various things. 'Taken by wisdom' refers to commonly established things. 'All the world commonly holds this matter,' explains the meaning of 'real.' The meaning here is that, for example, a piece of land is commonly posited by all the world and called 'earth.' This earth is habitually practiced from beginningless time, understood accordingly, and taken by wisdom, so all the world commonly holds this matter, believing that this is earth and not fire, and so on, broadly speaking of all other dharmas. Now, let's temporarily take the example of the earth that can be created, the form that is created, etc., and all other dharmas should be understood accordingly. This explains the three words 'worldly ultimate attainment' in the first sentence of the verse. Treatise: This foundation is established based on what is held. Commentary: In this verse, the first sentence is based on the two words 'one two.' However, in the world, there are also good minds or neutral minds, etc., saying that earth is not fire, and it is not that there are no people who are attached to it. Now, here is the true principle, which is encompassed by the reality of ultimate attainment. However, this theory also belongs to the dependent arising nature (依他起性, yitaqixing), that is, it encompasses the two natures. This argument is based on a part of what is held. The Yogacara (瑜伽, Yuqie) is based on a part of the dependent arising nature, so the Cheng Weishi Lun (成唯識論, Treatise on the Establishment of Consciousness-only) will take it. Treatise: If there is reason and meaning that reaches its ultimate point and becomes real, what is that? Commentary: 'If there is reason and meaning' is the meaning of having reason. This explains the two words 'reason and meaning.' Those such as heretics are called 'intelligent ones,' those such as inner dharmas are called 'virtuous ones,' and all ordinary beings are called 'thinkers.' In the Yogacarabhumi-sastra, although there are many people, they are all encompassed by these three. These are all meanings of ultimate attainment. Based on the three proofs (三量, sanliang) and the four kinds of reasoning, the principle of attainment is proven. Establishing this principle is called the reality of the ultimate attainment of reason and meaning. The meaning of reality is explained based on the three proofs, etc. This generally explains the three words on the second sentence of the verse. Treatise: This is established based on the three fundamental realities.

述曰。此解頌中第二句下二字。若心所變唯依他起。若真如等即凈所行收。若執心緣即世間攝。瑜伽依此說唯依他。此中所成可通三性。故三性攝。由此唯識作此會言。理通執無執雜染清凈故。此二體性。如瑜伽等。不能繁引。

論曰。凈所行至真實而立。

述曰。將釋第七齣體問起。煩惱障之凈智之所行皆依士釋。所行即真實是持業釋。所知障等準此應知。初即人觀。后為法觀。所行即二無我。

論頌曰。凈所行有二依一圓成實。

述曰。二無我理故。

論曰。煩惱所知至凈智境故。

述曰。此據無間初解脫道無分別智不緣余性故。唯一圓成實。若后得智等。何妨亦緣許通三性。雖無許亦無文遮。此與瑜伽唯識等同。

論曰。云何應知至三真實耶。

述曰。將釋第八列名徴起。

論頌曰。名遍計所執至圓成實所攝。

述曰。上二句是二性。下二句是一性。

論曰。相等五事至三種真實。

述曰。非次第攝故言隨應。

論曰。謂名攝在至真如正智。

述曰。此中攝義及餘論四處各異。如成唯識第八大和會。

論曰。差別真實至真實立耶。

述曰。將釋第九列名徴文。舊名分破。此不應然。逕庭故。將此七名體

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：述曰：這是解釋頌文中第二句下面的兩個字。如果心所變現的只是依他起性（Paratantra-svabhava），那麼真如等就屬於凈所行性。如果執著心緣，那就是世間所攝。瑜伽行派（Yogacara）依據這個理論說只有依他起性。這裡所成就的可以通達三種自性，所以被三種自性所攝。因此唯識宗（Vijnanavada）這樣會通說：『理通達執著與不執著，雜染與清凈』，這兩種體性，如《瑜伽師地論》等所說，不能在此繁瑣地引用。

論曰：凈所行性乃至真實而建立。

述曰：將要解釋第七識的體性，提出疑問。煩惱障的清凈智慧所行，都是依士釋。所行即真實，是持業釋。所知障等，依此準繩應該知道。最初是人觀，後來是法觀。所行就是二無我（Dvai-nairatmya）。

論頌曰：凈所行性有二，依一圓成實性（Parinispanna-svabhava）。

述曰：因為二無我的道理。

論曰：煩惱所知二障的清凈智慧的境界。

述曰：這是根據無間初解脫道（Anantarya-vimoksha-marga），無分別智（Nirvikalpa-jnana）不緣其他自性，所以唯一是圓成實性。如果后得智等，不妨也緣，允許通達三種自性。雖然沒有允許，也沒有文字遮止。這與《瑜伽師地論》、《唯識論》等相同。

論曰：怎樣才能知道三種真實呢？

述曰：將要解釋第八識，列出名稱，提出疑問。

論頌曰：名稱是遍計所執性（Parikalpita-svabhava）乃至圓成實性所攝。

述曰：上面兩句是兩種自性，下面兩句是一種自性。

論曰：相等五事乃至三種真實。

述曰：不是按照次第攝入，所以說是隨應。

論曰：所謂名稱攝在乃至真如正智。

述曰：這裡攝入的意義，以及其他論典的四處各不相同，如《成唯識論》第八大和會所說。

論曰：差別真實乃至真實建立嗎？

述曰：將要解釋第九識，列出名稱，提出疑問。舊譯名為分破，這樣不應該。因為不符合經典。將這七個名稱的體性

【English Translation】 English version: Commentary: This explains the two words below the second line in the verse. If what the mind transforms is only the Paratantra-svabhava (dependent nature), then Suchness (Tathata) and others are included in the purified object. If one clings to the object of the mind, then it is included in the mundane. Yogacara (Yoga practice school) relies on this to say that there is only Paratantra-svabhava. What is accomplished here can penetrate the three natures, so it is included by the three natures. Therefore, Vijnanavada (Consciousness-only school) makes this synthesis, saying: 'The principle penetrates clinging and non-clinging, defilement and purity.' These two entities, as stated in the Yogacarabhumi-sastra (Treatise on the Stages of Yoga Practice) and others, cannot be cited in detail here.

Treatise: The purified object is established up to reality.

Commentary: About to explain the nature of the seventh consciousness, raising a question. The purified wisdom that acts on the afflictive obscuration (Klesa-avarana) is interpreted as 'depending on the agent'. 'What is acted upon is reality' is interpreted as 'possessing the action'. The cognitive obscuration (Jnana-avarana) and others should be understood according to this standard. Initially, it is the contemplation of persons; later, it is the contemplation of dharmas. What is acted upon is the two non-selves (Dvai-nairatmya).

Verse: The purified object has two, relying on one Parinispanna-svabhava (perfected nature).

Commentary: Because of the principle of the two non-selves.

Treatise: The realm of pure wisdom of the two obscurations, afflictive and cognitive.

Commentary: This is based on the Anantarya-vimoksha-marga (path of immediate liberation), where Nirvikalpa-jnana (non-discriminating wisdom) does not relate to other natures, so it is solely the Parinispanna-svabhava. If it is subsequent wisdom, it may as well relate, allowing penetration of the three natures. Although there is no permission, there is no textual prohibition either. This is the same as the Yogacarabhumi-sastra, Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi (Treatise on the Establishment of Consciousness-only), and others.

Treatise: How should one know the three realities?

Commentary: About to explain the eighth consciousness, listing the names, raising a question.

Verse: The name is Parikalpita-svabhava (imagined nature), up to what is included in the Parinispanna-svabhava.

Commentary: The above two lines are two natures; the bottom two lines are one nature.

Treatise: The five matters such as name, up to the three realities.

Commentary: It is not included according to sequence, so it is said to be 'accordingly'.

Treatise: What is called 'name' is included in Suchness and Correct Wisdom.

Commentary: The meaning of inclusion here, and the four places in other treatises, are different, as stated in the eighth great assembly of the Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi.

Treatise: Is the differentiated reality established up to reality?

Commentary: About to explain the ninth consciousness, listing the names, raising a question. The old translation is called 'divided and broken', which should not be the case, because it does not conform to the scriptures. About the nature of these seven names

性。亦會解深密瑜伽顯揚佛地論等。如唯識疏。

論頌曰。流轉與安立至正行依后一。

述曰。雖有七如。略為二例。三依二性。四依一性頌二三句如應知。

論曰。流轉等七至三種真實。

述曰。以非次第。亦言隨應。其義何者。

論曰。謂彼流轉至圓成實立。

述曰。此釋頌文為二例。三隨相相攝。流轉妄執緣起生死法故。餘二雜染故。餘四實義唯圓成實。舊論云說。聖智所顯故。梵本無此言。譯者添之。此等與唯識相違。彼論自會。

論曰。善巧真實至說有十種。

述曰。自下釋第十善巧真實。即牒品初頌中第七八句。十善巧真實皆為除我見。此立宗已方生下頌。

論曰。云何于蘊等起十我見耶。

述曰。將釋善巧。先明所治。于中初問后舉頌答。

論頌曰。于蘊等我見至觀縛解者性。

述曰。明善巧中總有九頌。合為三段。初一頌半明十善巧所治我見。次有半頌明善巧實依根本立。後有七頌明十善巧。此即初也言于蘊等我見。此總舉宗。執一因下方出十見。

論曰。于蘊等十法起十種我見。

述曰。此總標舉。言于蘊等。即緣于蘊等起我見也。說離蘊等計以自心相決定有。故言于蘊等也。或復此中唯即于蘊等計。無

【現代漢語翻譯】性（性，nature）。也會解釋《深密瑜伽顯揚佛地論》等，如《唯識疏》（唯識疏，Commentary on Consciousness-only Treatise）。

論頌說：『流轉與安立，至正行依后一。』

述記說：『雖有七如，略為二例。三依二性，四依一性，頌二三句如應知。』

論說：『流轉等七，至三種真實。』

述記說：『以非次第，亦言隨應。其義何者？』

論說：『謂彼流轉，至圓成實立。』

述記說：『此釋頌文為二例。三隨相相攝，流轉妄執緣起生死法故。餘二雜染故。餘四實義唯圓成實。舊論云說，聖智所顯故。梵本無此言，譯者添之。此等與唯識相違，彼論自會。』

論說：『善巧真實，至說有十種。』

述記說：『自下釋第十善巧真實，即牒品初頌中第七八句。十善巧真實皆為除我見。此立宗已方生下頌。』

論說：『云何于蘊（蘊，skandha）等起十我見耶？』

述記說：『將釋善巧，先明所治。于中初問后舉頌答。』

論頌說：『于蘊等我見，至觀縛解者性。』

述記說：『明善巧中總有九頌，合為三段。初一頌半明十善巧所治我見。次有半頌明善巧實依根本立。後有七頌明十善巧。此即初也。言于蘊等我見，此總舉宗。執一因下方出十見。』

論說：『于蘊等十法，起十種我見。』

述記說：『此總標舉。言于蘊等，即緣于蘊等起我見也。說離蘊等計以自心相決定有，故言于蘊等也。或復此中唯即于蘊等計，無

【English Translation】 English version: It also explains treatises such as the Saṃdhinirmocana-yoga-alaṃkāra-buddhabhūmi-śāstra (Explanation of the Profound Secrets, Yoga, Adornment, Buddha-land Treatise), such as the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi-śāstra (Consciousness-only Treatise).

The verse of the treatise says: 'Flowing and establishing, to right practice relying on the latter one.'

The commentary says: 'Although there are seven suchnesses, they are briefly exemplified in two ways. Three rely on two natures, and four rely on one nature. The second and third lines of the verse should be understood accordingly.'

The treatise says: 'The seven, such as flowing, lead to the three kinds of reality.'

The commentary says: 'Because it is not in order, it is also said to be according to what is appropriate. What is the meaning of this?'

The treatise says: 'That is to say, that flowing leads to the establishment of perfect reality.'

The commentary says: 'This explanation of the verse is in two examples. The three are included in the aspect of characteristics, because flowing is the deluded attachment to the arising, existence, and death of phenomena. The remaining two are defiled. The remaining four are the true meaning, only perfect reality. The old treatise says that it is manifested by the wisdom of the sages. The Sanskrit version does not have this statement; the translator added it. These contradict the Consciousness-only doctrine, but that treatise will reconcile them itself.'

The treatise says: 'Skillful reality leads to the statement that there are ten kinds.'

The commentary says: 'From here on, the tenth skillful reality is explained, which is the seventh and eighth lines of the initial verse of the chapter. All ten skillful realities are for removing the view of self. After establishing this thesis, the following verse arises.'

The treatise says: 'How do the ten views of self arise in relation to the skandhas (aggregates) and so on?'

The commentary says: 'When explaining skillfulness, first clarify what is to be treated. Among them, first ask the question and then cite the verse to answer.'

The verse of the treatise says: 'In relation to the skandhas (aggregates) and so on, the view of self leads to observing the nature of the bound and liberated.'

The commentary says: 'In clarifying skillfulness, there are a total of nine verses, which are combined into three sections. The first one and a half verses clarify the view of self that is treated by the ten skillful realities. The next half verse clarifies that the skillful reality is actually established based on the fundamental. The last seven verses clarify the ten skillful realities. This is the first one. The statement 'in relation to the skandhas (aggregates) and so on, the view of self' is a general statement of the thesis. Holding onto one cause, the ten views are then presented.'

The treatise says: 'In relation to the ten dharmas such as the skandhas (aggregates), ten kinds of views of self arise.'

The commentary says: 'This is a general statement. The statement 'in relation to the skandhas (aggregates) and so on' means that the view of self arises in relation to the skandhas (aggregates) and so on. It is said that apart from the skandhas (aggregates) and so on, it is determined by one's own mind, so it is said 'in relation to the skandhas (aggregates) and so on'. Or perhaps in this case, it is only counted in relation to the skandhas (aggregates) and so on, without

別離蘊計故言于蘊等。

論曰。一執一性至十執縛解者性。

述曰。即十善巧別所治也。謂執蘊體為我是一。今說有五。執界是我而能為因。今說是界。執處為我然是受者。今說于處。執緣起是我作者性。故今說是緣生。執蘊等義有自在力令法如是不如是等。今說於我無有自在即處非處。執根是我有增上用。今說是根。執即蘊等我是常根。說於世。執我是一為染及凈二別法依。今說四諦。執蘊等我體是觀者。三乘觀異今說三乘。執蘊等我有縛有解。今說有為無為。唯說有漏有縛非余。此是所治。

論曰。為除此見修十善巧。

述曰。善巧是智。智慧除見故次修也。

論曰。云何十種至真實建立。

述曰。自下第二段將明善巧真實依根本義。先問起也。真實者謂理也。善巧所緣之境。

論曰。以蘊等十至自性中故。

述曰。此總答前問。

論曰。如何攝在三自性中。

述曰。前答總故更審問之。

論頌曰。此所執分別法性義在彼。

述曰。自下審答。此者。此十真實也。在彼者。在彼根本真實也。在於中等。皆第七轉由。此十中所執等義故。所以在彼本實中。

論曰。此蘊等十各有三義。

述曰。總舉所明蘊等十法各有三義。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本『別離蘊計故言于蘊等』的意思是，因為要破除對蘊等的錯誤執著，所以才說蘊等。

論曰：『一執一性至十執縛解者性』。

述曰：這裡指的是十種善巧分別所要對治的對象。也就是執著蘊的自體為『我』，認為『我』是單一的。現在說有五蘊。執著界（dhatu）（構成要素）是『我』，並且能夠作為原因。現在說的是十八界。執著處（ayatana）（感官領域）是『我』，並且是受者。現在說的是十二處。執著緣起（pratītyasamutpāda）（因緣生法）是『我』，具有作者的性質。所以現在說的是緣生。執著蘊等的意義具有自在的力量，能夠使法這樣或不這樣等等。現在說的是『我』沒有自在，即非處（非理）和是處（合理）。執著根（indriya）（感官）是『我』，具有增上的作用。現在說的是六根。執著即蘊等是『我』，是常恒的根源。說的是世間。執著『我』是單一的，是染污和清凈兩種不同法的所依。現在說的是四聖諦（catvāri-āryasatyāni）。執著蘊等『我』的自體是觀者。三乘（triyāna）（聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘）的觀行不同，現在說的是三乘。執著蘊等『我』有束縛和解脫。現在說的是有為法（saṃskṛta）和無為法（asaṃskṛta）。只說有漏法（sāsrava）有束縛，其餘則沒有。這些都是所要對治的。

論曰：『為除此見修十善巧』。

述曰：善巧是智慧。因為智慧能夠去除邪見，所以接下來修習善巧。

論曰：『云何十種至真實建立』？

述曰：從下面第二段開始，將要闡明善巧真實所依據的根本意義。先提出問題。真實指的是真理。善巧所緣的境界。

論曰：『以蘊等十至自性中故』。

述曰：這是總的回答前面的問題。

論曰：『如何攝在三自性中』？

述曰：因為前面的回答是總體的，所以進一步詳細詢問。

論頌曰：『此所執分別法性義在彼』。

述曰：從下面開始詳細回答。『此』指的是這十種真實。『在彼』指的是在那個根本真實中。『在於中』等等，都是第七轉格，表示『由於』。由於這十種真實中所執著等的意義，所以存在於那個根本真實中。

論曰：『此蘊等十各有三義』。

述曰：總的舉出所要闡明的蘊等十法，各自具有三種意義。

【English Translation】 English version 『Because of distinguishing and calculating aggregates, it is spoken of as aggregates, etc.』

Treatise says: 『From one clinging to one nature to ten clinging to the nature of bondage and liberation.』

Commentary says: This refers to the objects to be counteracted by the ten skillful means of discernment. That is, clinging to the substance of the aggregates as 『I,』 considering 『I』 to be singular. Now it is said that there are five aggregates. Clinging to the realms (dhatu) (elements) as 『I』 and capable of being a cause. Now it speaks of the eighteen realms. Clinging to the sense bases (ayatana) (sense fields) as 『I』 and being the receiver. Now it speaks of the twelve sense bases. Clinging to dependent origination (pratītyasamutpāda) (arising from conditions) as 『I,』 having the nature of an agent. Therefore, now it speaks of dependent arising. Clinging to the meaning of aggregates, etc., as having the power of autonomy, capable of making phenomena be thus or not thus, etc. Now it speaks of 『I』 having no autonomy, that is, what is not a proper ground (hetu) and what is a proper ground. Clinging to the faculties (indriya) (senses) as 『I,』 having the function of dominance. Now it speaks of the six faculties. Clinging to the aggregates, etc., as 『I,』 being the constant root. It speaks of the world. Clinging to 『I』 as singular, being the basis for the two distinct phenomena of defilement and purity. Now it speaks of the Four Noble Truths (catvāri-āryasatyāni). Clinging to the substance of the aggregates, etc., as 『I,』 being the observer. The three vehicles (triyāna) (Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna, Bodhisattvayāna) have different observations; now it speaks of the three vehicles. Clinging to the aggregates, etc., as 『I,』 having bondage and liberation. Now it speaks of conditioned (saṃskṛta) and unconditioned (asaṃskṛta) phenomena. It only speaks of defiled (sāsrava) phenomena having bondage, not the rest. These are what are to be counteracted.

Treatise says: 『To eliminate these views, cultivate the ten skillful means.』

Commentary says: Skillful means are wisdom. Because wisdom can eliminate wrong views, therefore, cultivate them next.

Treatise says: 『What are the ten kinds, up to the establishment of reality?』

Commentary says: From the second section below, it will clarify the fundamental meaning upon which the reality of skillful means relies. First, a question is raised. Reality refers to truth. The object of the skillful means.

Treatise says: 『With the ten aggregates, etc., up to in their own nature.』

Commentary says: This is a general answer to the previous question.

Treatise says: 『How are they included in the three natures?』

Commentary says: Because the previous answer was general, it is further inquired into in detail.

Verse says: 『The meaning of the nature of phenomena distinguished by these clingings is in that.』

Commentary says: From below, a detailed answer begins. 『This』 refers to these ten realities. 『In that』 refers to in that fundamental reality. 『In the middle,』 etc., are all in the seventh case, indicating 『because of.』 Because of the meaning of the clingings, etc., in these ten realities, therefore, they exist in that fundamental reality.

Treatise says: 『These ten aggregates, etc., each have three meanings.』

Commentary says: Generally listing the ten phenomena of aggregates, etc., to be clarified, each has three meanings.

論曰。且色蘊中至圓成實性。

述曰。簡餘九法。偈明於色。故說且言。然色者是色蘊一蘊中總。然通三別性。故言色之遍計所執性。依依士釋訓色。通此性此色體無。是依他色蘊之所執性。故假說為色蘊是所執性攝。以所執色無體非蘊故。又色蘊是依他性之別法。依他性是總寬故。別色之依他起性。依依士釋名依他色。此中唯有亂識分別。以為色故。非是執為。此實色蘊名依他性。此依他色之理假名色蘊。是圓成實攝。亦依依士釋。

論曰。如色蘊中至隨應當知。

述曰。蘊有五種。於色作法例餘四蘊及界等九各有三義。隨其界等所應道理各有三也。

論曰。如是蘊等至真實而立。

述曰。上來出理。下入性收。隨應假實。如蘊中說。

論曰。如是雖說至修蘊等善巧。

述曰。此牒前文所明之義。顯由未盡故說雖言。

論曰。而未說此蘊等別義。

述曰。此正問也。即問其事善巧所依。依蘊等法修善巧故。

論曰。且初蘊義云何應知。

述曰。先問蘊也。

論頌曰。非一及總略分段義名蘊。

述曰。明善巧中。自下第三明十法也。于中有二。初別明十法。后結修善巧。初中合有七頌。初半明蘊。次半明界。次半明處。次

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本論曰：且說色蘊中包含遍計所執性、依他起性、圓成實性。

述曰：這是爲了簡別其餘九法，用偈頌來闡明色蘊。所以說『且』字。然而，『色』是指色蘊這一蘊的總稱。它貫通三種不同的自性。所以說，色的遍計所執性，是按照『依』和『士』來解釋『色』。普遍認為此自性（遍計所執性）的色體是不存在的。這是依他起性的色蘊所執著的自性。所以假說色蘊是被遍計所執性所攝。因為所執著的色沒有實體，不是蘊。而且，色蘊是依他起性的別法。依他起性是總的、寬泛的。個別的色是依他起性。按照『依』和『士』來解釋，名為依他起色。這其中只有虛妄的意識分別，認為它是色。但並非執著於此為真實的色蘊，這被稱為依他起性。這依他起色的道理，假名為色蘊，是被圓成實性所攝。也是按照『依』和『士』來解釋。

論曰：如色蘊中，其餘四蘊以及十八界等九法，也應隨其道理而知。

述曰：蘊有五種。在色蘊上所作的闡述，可以作為其餘四蘊以及十八界等九法的例證，它們各自都有三種自性。隨著界等所應的道理，各自都有三種自性。

論曰：像這樣，蘊等是隨應假立和真實而建立的。

述曰：上面是闡述道理，下面是歸入自性，隨著情況假立和真實。如在蘊中說的那樣。

論曰：像這樣雖然說了蘊等，但還沒有窮盡其義，所以說『雖』。

述曰：這是承接前文所闡明的意義。顯示因為沒有窮盡，所以說『雖』字。

論曰：而沒有說這些蘊等的個別意義。

述曰：這是正式的提問。即提問善巧所依據的事物。因為依靠蘊等法來修習善巧。

論曰：且最初的蘊的意義應該如何理解？

述曰：先提問蘊。

論頌曰：非一、及總、略、分、段義名蘊（skandha）。

述曰：在闡明善巧中，從下面開始第三部分是闡明十法。其中有兩部分。首先分別闡明十法，然後總結修習善巧。最初的部分共有七個偈頌。最初的半個偈頌闡明蘊，接下來的半個偈頌闡明界，再接下來的半個偈頌闡明處。

【English Translation】 English version Treatise says: Furthermore, within the skandha (aggregate) of form (rupa-skandha), there are the three natures: the parikalpita-svabhava (the completely imputed nature), the paratantra-svabhava (the dependent nature), and the parinispanna-svabhava (the perfectly accomplished nature).

Commentary says: This is to distinguish the other nine dharmas (elements of existence). The verse clarifies the skandha of form. Therefore, the word 'furthermore' is used. However, 'form' refers to the totality of the rupa-skandha. It encompasses the three distinct natures. Therefore, it is said that the parikalpita-svabhava of form is explained according to 'dependent' and 'agent'. It is generally accepted that the substance of this nature (parikalpita-svabhava) of form does not exist. This is the nature grasped by the paratantra-svabhava of the rupa-skandha. Therefore, it is hypothetically said that the rupa-skandha is included in the parikalpita-svabhava. Because the grasped form has no substance and is not a skandha. Moreover, the rupa-skandha is a distinct dharma of the paratantra-svabhava. The paratantra-svabhava is general and broad. The individual form is the paratantra-utpatti-svabhava (the dependently arisen nature). Explained according to 'dependent' and 'agent', it is called paratantra form. Within this, there is only confused consciousness distinguishing and considering it as form. But it is not grasped as the real rupa-skandha, which is called paratantra-svabhava. The principle of this paratantra form, hypothetically named rupa-skandha, is included in the parinispanna-svabhava. It is also explained according to 'dependent' and 'agent'.

Treatise says: As in the rupa-skandha, the other four skandhas and the nine dharmas such as the eighteen dhatus (elements), should also be understood according to their respective principles.

Commentary says: There are five skandhas. The explanation given for the rupa-skandha can be used as an example for the other four skandhas and the nine dharmas such as the eighteen dhatus, each of which has three natures. According to the principles that apply to the dhatus and so on, each has three natures.

Treatise says: Like this, the skandhas and so on are established according to what is conventionally posited and what is real.

Commentary says: Above is the explanation of the principles, below is the inclusion into the natures, conventionally posited and real according to the situation. As said in the skandhas.

Treatise says: Although the skandhas and so on have been discussed in this way, their meaning has not been fully exhausted, therefore the word 'although' is used.

Commentary says: This is to connect with the meaning explained in the previous text. It shows that because it is not fully exhausted, the word 'although' is used.

Treatise says: But the individual meanings of these skandhas and so on have not been discussed.

Commentary says: This is the formal question. That is, asking about the things upon which skillfulness relies. Because one relies on the dharmas such as the skandhas to cultivate skillfulness.

Treatise says: Furthermore, how should the meaning of the initial skandha be understood?

Commentary says: First, the skandha is questioned.

Verse says: 'Non-one, and aggregate, abbreviated, divided, sectional meaning is called skandha (aggregate).'

Commentary says: In explaining skillfulness, the third part from below is explaining the ten dharmas. There are two parts within this. First, the ten dharmas are explained separately, then the cultivation of skillfulness is summarized. The initial part has a total of seven verses. The initial half verse explains the skandha, the following half verse explains the dhatu, and the half verse after that explains the ayatana (sense fields).

半明緣起。次一頌明處非處。次半明根。次半明世。次一頌明四諦。次一頌明三乘。次一頌明有無為。此即初也。上八字述三義。下二字結所明名。即一義字貫通三處。

論曰。應知蘊等略有三義。

述曰。此總標數。

論曰。一非一義至若遠若近。

述曰。有十一故言非一也。對法第二俱舍第一等皆有此文。不知何經。或說多界經。

論曰。二總略義至略為一聚。

述曰。總略十一色名一色蘊。故名總略也。

論曰。三分段義至說名色蘊等。

述曰。可分段為色蘊受蘊等。

論曰。各別安立色等相故。

述曰。釋分段義。各別安立色受想等相故。問曰處亦應名蘊。各別安立名眼處等故。答此不然。一切十一變礙色名為色蘊。非一切變礙極微色皆名眼處故。此經言。諸所有色若過去乃至若近。如是一切略為一聚。說名色蘊等一經。今論主以為三義然餘論但為二義。無別分出此第三義。

論曰。由斯聚義至聚義名蘊。

述曰。此三義故聚義名蘊。此結義成。復引世喻。如場麥蘊等。

論曰。已說蘊義界義云何。

述曰。此結前生后。

論頌曰。能所取彼又種子義名界。

述曰。上句出三體。下句釋界義即種子義通

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：半明緣起（Pratītyasamutpāda，指事物相互依存的生起），接下來一頌說明處非處（sthāna-asthāna，指可能性與不可能性）。接下來半頌說明根（indriya，指感覺器官）。接下來半頌說明世（loka，指世界）。接下來一頌說明四諦（catvāri āryasatyāni，指四聖諦）。接下來一頌說明三乘（triyāna，指聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘）。接下來一頌說明有為（saṃskṛta，指有條件的事物）和無為（asaṃskṛta，指無條件的事物）。這就是最初的部分。上面八個字陳述了三種意義，下面兩個字總結了所要說明的名稱，即『義』字貫穿三處。論曰：應知蘊等略有三義。述曰：此總標數。論曰：一非一義至若遠若近。述曰：有十一故言非一也。對法第二俱舍第一等皆有此文。不知何經。或說多界經。論曰：二總略義至略為一聚。述曰：總略十一色名一色蘊。故名總略也。論曰：三分段義至說名色蘊等。述曰：可分段為色蘊（rūpa-skandha，指色蘊）、受蘊（vedanā-skandha，指受蘊）等。論曰：各別安立色等相故。述曰：釋分段義。各別安立色受想等相故。問曰處亦應名蘊。各別安立名眼處等故。答此不然。一切十一變礙色名為色蘊。非一切變礙極微色皆名眼處故。此經言。諸所有色若過去乃至若近。如是一切略為一聚。說名色蘊等一經。今論主以為三義然餘論但為二義。無別分出此第三義。論曰：由斯聚義至聚義名蘊。述曰：此三義故聚義名蘊。此結義成。復引世喻。如場麥蘊等。論曰：已說蘊義界義云何。述曰：此結前生后。論頌曰：能所取彼又種子義名界。述曰：上句出三體。下句釋界義即種子義通

【English Translation】 English version: Half explains Pratītyasamutpāda (dependent origination). The next verse explains sthāna-asthāna (possibility and impossibility). The next half verse explains indriya (faculty). The next half verse explains loka (world). The next verse explains the Four Noble Truths (catvāri āryasatyāni). The next verse explains the Three Vehicles (triyāna: Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna, and Bodhisattvayāna). The next verse explains saṃskṛta (conditioned) and asaṃskṛta (unconditioned). This is the beginning. The above eight characters state three meanings, and the following two characters summarize the name to be explained, that is, the character 'meaning' runs through the three places. Treatise says: It should be known that the skandhas (aggregates) and so on have roughly three meanings. Commentary says: This generally marks the number. Treatise says: First, the meaning of non-oneness, whether far or near. Commentary says: Because there are eleven, it is said to be non-one. This text is found in Abhidharma II, Abhidharmakośa I, etc. I don't know which sutra. Perhaps it is the Sutra of Many Realms. Treatise says: Second, the meaning of summarizing, to briefly gather into one. Commentary says: Generally summarizing eleven forms is called one rūpa-skandha (aggregate of form). Therefore, it is called summarizing. Treatise says: Third, the meaning of segmentation, to be called rūpa-skandha (aggregate of form), etc. Commentary says: It can be segmented into rūpa-skandha (aggregate of form), vedanā-skandha (aggregate of feeling), etc. Treatise says: Because each separately establishes the characteristics of form, etc. Commentary says: Explaining the meaning of segmentation. Because each separately establishes the characteristics of form, feeling, thought, etc. Question: The āyatanas (sense bases) should also be called skandhas (aggregates), because each separately establishes the names of eye-āyatana (eye base), etc. Answer: This is not so. All eleven obstructive forms are called rūpa-skandha (aggregate of form). Not all obstructive extremely small forms are called eye-āyatana (eye base). This sutra says: All forms, whether past or near, are briefly gathered into one, and called rūpa-skandha (aggregate of form), etc. one sutra. Now the treatise master considers it to have three meanings, but other treatises only have two meanings. This third meaning is not separately distinguished. Treatise says: Because of this meaning of gathering, the meaning of gathering is called skandha (aggregate). Commentary says: Because of these three meanings, the meaning of gathering is called skandha (aggregate). This concludes the meaning. It also cites worldly metaphors, such as a field of wheat aggregates, etc. Treatise says: The meaning of skandha (aggregate) has been explained, what is the meaning of dhātu (realm)? Commentary says: This connects the previous and generates the next. Verse says: The able and the taken, and the meaning of seed, is called dhātu (realm). Commentary says: The upper sentence gives the three entities. The lower sentence explains the meaning of dhātu (realm), that is, the meaning of seed is universal.

三取也。

論曰。能取種子義至六識界。

述曰。六識名彼取者。彼或彼所取色。彼所取色等之了別能取故。彼或彼能取。彼能取之能依了別境故。彼或彼根境。彼能取根之能依。彼所取境之能取。彼二之了別取故。彼或屬根等。取屬於識。是依士釋。若依彼體即取謂六識。是不如根等所依不名能取。不同境等唯所取不名所取。故名彼取。彼取彼了別能取也。即持業釋。此名種子者。種子是界義。現行亦名種子。

論曰。已說界義至用門義名處。

述曰。結問準前。

論曰。此中能受至是外六處。

述曰。受用者謂六識。能受者謂六根。六根為六識受用之門故。言能受用門義。境準可知。門者所由之住根境。為識生所由之境故名為門。或從喻為名。

論曰。已說處義至果用無增減。

述曰。緣起義者。舉此所明。于因果用。顯所於三法。無增減者。明三法皆然。

論曰。于因果用至是緣起義。

述曰。總舉大綱所明之意。

論曰。此中增益因者至執彼無因。

述曰。執大自在自然本際宿作我等為因故。於行之因無明上增益故。名增益因。乃至老死可知。若執行等無因而生。撥無無明等。名損減因。即對法第四瑜伽第十等。有為遮計立緣生

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：三取也。

論曰：能取種子義至六識界。

述曰：六識名彼取者。彼或彼所取色（所取之境）。彼所取色等之了別能取故。彼或彼能取。彼能取之能依了別境故。彼或彼根境。彼能取根之能依。彼所取境之能取。彼二之了別取故。彼或屬根等。取屬於識。是依士釋。若依彼體即取謂六識。是不如根等所依不名能取。不同境等唯所取不名所取。故名彼取。彼取彼了別能取也。即持業釋。此名種子者。種子是界義。現行亦名種子。

論曰：已說界義至用門義名處。

述曰：結問準前。

論曰：此中能受至是外六處。

述曰：受用者謂六識。能受者謂六根。六根為六識受用之門故。言能受用門義。境準可知。門者所由之住根境。為識生所由之境故名為門。或從喻為名。

論曰：已說處義至果用無增減。

述曰：緣起義者。舉此所明。于因果用。顯所於三法。無增減者。明三法皆然。

論曰：于因果用至是緣起義。

述曰：總舉大綱所明之意。

論曰：此中增益因者至執彼無因。

述曰：執大自在（神名），自然，本際，宿作，我等為因故。於行之因無明上增益故。名增益因。乃至老死可知。若執行等無因而生。撥無無明等。名損減因。即對法第四瑜伽第十等。有為遮計立緣生

【English Translation】 English version: These are the three kinds of grasping.

Treatise states: 'The meaning of 'able to grasp seeds' extends to the six consciousness realms.'

Commentary states: 'The six consciousnesses are called 'that which grasps'. 'That' refers to the objects grasped, such as form (rupa). Because they are able to grasp and distinguish those objects. 'That' also refers to that which is able to grasp. Because they rely on the ability to grasp to distinguish objects. 'That' also refers to the sense bases (ayatana) and objects. Because they rely on the ability to grasp the sense bases, and they grasp the objects. Because they grasp and distinguish between the two. 'That' also refers to belonging to the sense bases, etc. Grasping belongs to consciousness. This is interpreted based on the agent. If based on their substance, 'grasping' refers to the six consciousnesses. Unlike the sense bases, which are relied upon but not called 'able to grasp'. Unlike objects, which are only grasped but not called 'that which grasps'. Therefore, they are called 'that which grasps'. 'That which grasps' is able to grasp and distinguish 'that'. This is interpreted based on possession. This is called 'seed' because 'seed' means 'realm'. Manifestation is also called 'seed'.'

Treatise states: 'Having explained the meaning of 'realm', the meaning of 'gate of function' is called 'place'.'

Commentary states: 'The concluding question follows the previous pattern.'

Treatise states: 'Here, that which is able to receive extends to the six external sense bases.'

Commentary states: 'That which is received and used refers to the six consciousnesses. That which is able to receive refers to the six sense bases. Because the six sense bases are the gates through which the six consciousnesses receive and use. Therefore, it is called the meaning of 'gate of able to receive and use'. The objects can be understood accordingly. 'Gate' refers to the sense bases and objects through which something arises. Because they are the objects through which consciousness arises, they are called 'gates'. Or the name is derived from a metaphor.'

Treatise states: 'Having explained the meaning of 'place', there is no increase or decrease in the function of cause and effect.'

Commentary states: 'The meaning of dependent origination (pratityasamutpada) is explained here. Regarding the function of cause and effect, it is shown that there is no increase or decrease in the three dharmas. This clarifies that all three dharmas are like this.'

Treatise states: 'Regarding the function of cause and effect, this is the meaning of dependent origination.'

Commentary states: 'This summarizes the main points of what is being explained.'

Treatise states: 'Here, 'increasing cause' refers to clinging to the belief that there is no cause.'

Commentary states: 'Clinging to the belief that Great自在 (Mahesvara, a deity), nature, original substance, past actions, self, etc., are the cause. Therefore, there is an increase on ignorance (avidya) as the cause of action (karma). Therefore, it is called 'increasing cause'. The same applies to old age and death. If one clings to the belief that actions, etc., arise without a cause, denying ignorance, etc., it is called 'decreasing cause'. This is explained in Abhidharmasamuccaya, Yoga-bhumi, and others. The conditioned (samskrta) is established as dependent origination to refute these views.'

等。正與此同。

論曰。增益果者至行等果。

述曰。行是無明果。行中實無我。今執行中有我為無明果。故名增益果。損減可知。乃至老死亦爾。

論曰。增益用者至全無功能。

述曰。無明之體與無明用不異不一。用之於體無別實法。今執此用離體實有與體定異。故增益用。然無明體有少功能生於行。言全無能。是撥無用。名損減也。即緣起自作他作四句中配釋。

論曰。若無如是至緣起善巧。

述曰。既離二執善巧得生。

論曰。已說緣起義至是處非處義。

述曰。頌中上三句列七種。第四結所明義。

論曰。處非處義至應知其相。

述曰。總述所明於七種處我無自在。

論曰。一于非處愛至俱時出現。

述曰。此四不自在文皆易知。不繁重釋。何故無二佛輪王。一無用故。二由輪王等作業時無相競業。設有同時發願修行。即他界地愿於此生亦不可得。理定無故。佛生雖可同。恐世厭故。亦不俱生。設有眾生二佛所化一時熟者。但可密化。不作佛化。亦定無有宜二佛出化有情。

論曰。五于勝主至轉輪王等。

述曰。此言等者。等取帝釋及梵王等。雖於色界無有女人。為顯勝生生。且說梵王等。

論曰。六于證

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：等等，情況與此相同。

論：增益果是指對行為及其結果的增益執著。

述：『行』（saṃskāra）是無明（avidyā）的結果。『行』的本質中實際上沒有『我』（ātman）。現在執著于『行』中有『我』，這是無明的結果，因此稱為增益果。損減果可以依此類推，乃至老死（jarā-maraṇa）也是如此。

論：增益用是指認為無明的作用是完全不存在的功能。

述：無明的本體和無明的作用，既不是完全相同，也不是完全不同。作用對於本體來說，沒有獨立存在的實體法。現在執著于這種作用脫離本體而真實存在，並且與本體截然不同，所以是增益用。然而，無明的本體具有少許功能，可以產生『行』。說『全無能』，就是否定其作用，這稱為損減。這可以結合緣起（pratītyasamutpāda）的自作、他作等四句來解釋。

論：如果沒有這樣的認知，那麼就無法產生對緣起的善巧理解。

述：如果能夠遠離這兩種執著，善巧的理解自然就能產生。

論：已經解釋了緣起的意義，接下來要解釋處非處（sthānāsthāna）的意義。

述：頌文中的前三句列舉了七種情況，第四句總結了所要闡明的意義。

論：處非處義是指應該瞭解其相狀。

述：總述所要闡明的是，在七種情況下，『我』沒有自在。

論：一是在不適當的地方產生愛慾，乃至同時出現。

述：這四種不自在的情況都很容易理解，不再繁瑣地解釋。為什麼沒有兩位佛陀或兩位轉輪王（cakravartin）同時出現呢？一是沒有必要，二是由於轉輪王等在作業時不會有相互競爭的情況。即使有同時發願修行的人，在其他世界發願要生於此世也是不可能的，因為道理上不允許。佛陀同時出現雖然有可能，但恐怕世人會厭煩，所以也不會同時出現。即使有眾生應該被兩位佛陀同時教化而成熟，也只能秘密地教化，而不會公開地以佛陀的身份教化。絕對不會出現適合兩位佛陀同時出現教化眾生的情況。

論：五是在殊勝的主宰者中，比如轉輪王等。

述：這裡說的『等』，包括帝釋（Indra）和梵天王（Brahmā）等。雖然在**沒有女人，但爲了顯示殊勝的出生，姑且說梵天王等。

論：六是在證悟...

【English Translation】 English version: And so on, the situation is the same as this.

Treatise: 『Augmentation of result』 refers to the clinging to actions and their consequences.

Commentary: 『Action』 (saṃskāra) is the result of ignorance (avidyā). In the essence of 『action』, there is actually no 『self』 (ātman). Now, clinging to the idea that there is a 『self』 in 『action』 is the result of ignorance, hence it is called augmentation of result. Diminution of result can be understood by analogy, even up to old age and death (jarā-maraṇa).

Treatise: 『Augmentation of function』 refers to the belief that the function of ignorance is a completely non-existent function.

Commentary: The essence of ignorance and the function of ignorance are neither completely the same nor completely different. The function, in relation to the essence, does not have an independently existing entity. Now, clinging to the idea that this function exists independently of the essence and is completely different from the essence is augmentation of function. However, the essence of ignorance has a slight function that can produce 『action』. Saying 『completely non-functional』 is to deny its function, which is called diminution. This can be explained in conjunction with the four statements of dependent origination (pratītyasamutpāda): self-caused, other-caused, etc.

Treatise: If there is no such understanding, then skillful understanding of dependent origination cannot arise.

Commentary: If one can be free from these two kinds of clinging, skillful understanding will naturally arise.

Treatise: The meaning of dependent origination has been explained; next, the meaning of possible and impossible (sthānāsthāna) will be explained.

Commentary: The first three lines of the verse list seven situations; the fourth line summarizes the meaning to be elucidated.

Treatise: The meaning of possible and impossible refers to understanding their characteristics.

Commentary: The general statement to be elucidated is that in seven situations, the 『self』 has no autonomy.

Treatise: First, generating desire in an inappropriate place, even to the point of simultaneous appearance.

Commentary: These four situations of non-autonomy are easy to understand and will not be explained in detail. Why are there no two Buddhas or two universal monarchs (cakravartin) appearing at the same time? First, it is unnecessary; second, because universal monarchs, etc., do not have situations of mutual competition when performing actions. Even if there are people who simultaneously make vows to cultivate, it is impossible to vow to be born in this world from other worlds, because it is not allowed in principle. Although it is possible for Buddhas to appear at the same time, it is feared that people would be disgusted, so they do not appear simultaneously. Even if there are beings who should be simultaneously taught and matured by two Buddhas, they can only be secretly taught, and will not be publicly taught as Buddhas. There will absolutely not be a situation suitable for two Buddhas to appear simultaneously to teach sentient beings.

Treatise: Fifth, among supreme rulers, such as universal monarchs, etc.

Commentary: The 『etc.』 here includes Indra (帝釋) and Brahmā (梵天王), etc. Although there are no women in ** , for the sake of showing supreme birth, Brahmā, etc., are mentioned for the time being.

Treatise: Sixth, in the attainment of...

得至正等菩提。

述曰。女人志弱根性非勝。依處下劣不得佛等。

論曰。七于現行至容可現行。

述曰。諸見諦者性戒成故。小乘貪等修斷聖不行。大乘見斷聖無有。以許色法亦見斷故。然于頌中。第四結句云處非處。今解。七種俱言非處。以非處義。雖破我有自在。故終不明處。

論曰。多界經中至是處非處。

述曰。此經明六十二界等名多界。如瑜伽第九十六卷說。

論曰。已說處非處義至用二凈增上。

述曰。問起頌答。根者是所明。增上者釋根義。余列所于果法六種事也。

論曰。二十二根至增上義立。

述曰。總舉明。

論曰。謂取境至未知等根有增上義。

述曰。此文易了。如瑜伽第五十七唯識第七卷說。

論曰。已說根義至是世義應知。

述曰。頌中初句出體。后句釋世義。于上句中。謂因果已用因果未用因已用果未用三世。應知。

論曰。應知因果至三世義別。

述曰。此總舉所明。于頌上句。隨應可解。

論曰。謂于因果至是現在義。

述曰。對法中說過去有八義。未來有七義。現在有五義。今此各唯據一義非盡理說。且如對法。說過去中。有因已滅果猶有故。即非因果已用義。今

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：

得至正等菩提（Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi，無上正等正覺）。

述曰：女人志向薄弱，根器和秉性並非上乘，所處的地位也卑微低下，因此無法證得佛陀的無上正等正覺。

論曰：七種煩惱在現行時，是容許現行的。

述曰：那些證得真諦的修行者，由於具有自性戒的緣故，小乘的貪慾等煩惱是通過修習來斷除的，聖者不會去做。大乘的見斷煩惱，聖者是沒有的，因為他們認為色法也是見斷的。然而在頌文中，第四句總結說『處非處』，現在解釋為，七種煩惱都可稱為『非處』，因為『非處』的含義，雖然破除了我具有自在的觀點，但最終並沒有明確什麼是『處』。

論曰：在《多界經》中，說的是處與非處。

述曰：這部經闡明了六十二界等，名為多界，如同《瑜伽師地論》第九十六卷所說。

論曰：已經說了處與非處的含義，是用兩種清凈增上來解釋的。

述曰：這是問起頌的回答。『根』是所要闡明的，『增上』是解釋根的含義，其餘列舉了根對於果法的六種作用。

論曰：二十二根，是增上義的建立。

述曰：這是總體的說明。

論曰：所謂取境，乃至未知等根，具有增上的作用。

述曰：這段文字很容易理解，如同《瑜伽師地論》第五十七卷和《唯識論》第七卷所說。

論曰：已經說了根的含義，這是世俗的含義，應當知曉。

述曰：頌文的第一句說明了體性，后一句解釋了世俗的含義。在上句中，所謂因果已用、因果未用、因已用果未用這三種世俗的含義，應當知曉。

論曰：應當知曉因果，這三種世俗的含義是不同的。

述曰：這是總體的說明，對於頌文的上句，可以根據情況來理解。

論曰：所謂因果，這是現在的含義。

述曰：在《對法論》中說，過去有八種含義，未來有七種含義，現在有五種含義。現在這裡只是根據一種含義來說，並非窮盡所有的道理。比如《對法論》中說，在過去中，有因已經滅去，果仍然存在的情況，這並非因果已經作用的含義。現在……

【English Translation】 English version:

Achieving Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi (Supreme Perfect Enlightenment).

Commentary: Women's aspirations are weak, their faculties and nature are not superior, and their circumstances are inferior, therefore they cannot attain the Buddha's Supreme Perfect Enlightenment.

Treatise: The seven defilements, when currently active, are permissible to be active.

Commentary: Those practitioners who have attained the truth, because they possess the precepts of their own nature, the afflictions such as greed in the Hinayana are eliminated through cultivation, which the saints do not do. The saints of the Mahayana do not have afflictions that are eliminated by seeing, because they believe that form is also eliminated by seeing. However, in the verse, the fourth concluding sentence says 'place and non-place'. Now it is explained that all seven types of afflictions can be called 'non-place', because the meaning of 'non-place', although it refutes the view that I have autonomy, ultimately does not clearly define what 'place' is.

Treatise: In the 'Multiple Realms Sutra', it speaks of place and non-place.

Commentary: This sutra elucidates the sixty-two realms, etc., and is called the Multiple Realms, as stated in the ninety-sixth volume of the Yogacarabhumi-sastra.

Treatise: The meaning of place and non-place has already been explained, and it is explained using two kinds of pure increase.

Commentary: This is the answer to the question that initiates the verse. 'Roots' are what is to be elucidated, 'increase' explains the meaning of roots, and the rest lists the six functions of roots in relation to the resultant dharmas.

Treatise: The twenty-two roots are the establishment of the meaning of increase.

Commentary: This is a general explanation.

Treatise: The so-called grasping of objects, and even the roots of the unknown, have the function of increase.

Commentary: This passage is easy to understand, as stated in the fifty-seventh volume of the Yogacarabhumi-sastra and the seventh volume of the Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi-sastra.

Treatise: The meaning of roots has already been explained, this is the worldly meaning, it should be known.

Commentary: The first sentence of the verse explains the essence, and the second sentence explains the worldly meaning. In the previous sentence, the three worldly meanings of cause and effect already used, cause and effect not yet used, cause already used and effect not yet used, should be known.

Treatise: It should be known that cause and effect, these three worldly meanings are different.

Commentary: This is a general explanation, and the previous sentence of the verse can be understood according to the circumstances.

Treatise: The so-called cause and effect, this is the meaning of the present.

Commentary: In the Abhidharma, it is said that the past has eight meanings, the future has seven meanings, and the present has five meanings. Now, this only speaks according to one meaning, and does not exhaust all the reasons. For example, in the Abhidharma, it is said that in the past, there is a situation where the cause has already ceased, but the effect still exists, which is not the meaning of cause and effect already functioning. Now...

但約全世一期作法。同瑜伽五十六。非約剎那少分世說同對法等。可如彼論及唯識第三卷說。

論曰。已說世義至是諦義應知。

述曰。三句頌解四諦。第四句結。余文可解。

論曰。應知諦者至謂順受法。

述曰。受根受境受相應法能順生受。皆苦諦攝。由此即簡無為無漏緣。雖受生。以不順故非苦諦攝。以受生是異熟生故。此中偏說。又如瑜伽五十五。苦諦寬集諦狹。

論曰。二集聖諦至所因諸行。

述曰。若所因即異熟法前為后因。皆是集諦。體性寬狹與苦無殊。同小乘說。今此文雖總同。五十五說為勝。

論曰。三滅聖諦至能對治道。

述曰。諸論但說苦滅為滅諦。今亦取集滅。據實說故。諸處約體。唯說于苦有漏皆盡。今說二滅顯二諦殊。亦不相違。釋諦義等。如對法第六七及瑜伽第五十五等說。

論曰。已說諦義至是乘義應知。

述曰。第九解乘。上三句出體。第四句結。謂第一句中由字通三乘。功德過失四字通二乘。第二句中智字通三乘。無分別字唯大乘。第三句中出離字通三乘。依他唯聲聞。自通獨覺及大乘二。謂依他故。觀涅槃功德生死過失而起。觀此德失之智得出離者。是聲聞乘。若不依他自唯依于自觀涅槃法生死過失而起。觀

此德失之智得出離者。名獨覺乘。若不依他唯依于自起無分別智觀法真如。利益一切而出離者。名大乘。然此大乘雖觀德失。顯求一切智度一切有情不為觀德失。故略不說。雖于因時獨覺菩薩亦依於他。以其根性及得果生唯樂依自故。略不說。此中智望于自乘果。皆是正因。所觀他等皆是疏緣。唯依此二說三乘別。非一切行皆同行也。

論曰。應知乘者至顯示其義。

述曰。頌中言總而義有別故。此長行說如應義。

論曰。若從他聞至名無上乘。

述曰。三乘差別如文易了。配頌如前。

論曰。已說乘義至若彼所觀義。

述曰。初句總。下三出體。于中五若。上三若是有為。下二若是無為。

論曰。應知此中假謂名等。

述曰。不相應中名最為勝。能攝諸法。舉此等餘一切假法。然瓶等法非別蘊法。雖假不說。舊論云。有言說名句味等者。不然。非一切不相應皆有言說故。

論曰。因謂種子所攝藏識。

述曰。若現若種。皆名為因故。

論曰。相謂器身並受用具。

述曰。體相易知故名為相。器者山河等。身者五根四塵聚所成身。受用具者即五欲資具。此不簡別何識所變。但此種類即此中收。

論曰。及轉識攝意取思惟。

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：若憑藉觀察過失和智慧而得出離的，稱為獨覺乘（Pratyekabuddha-yana，緣覺乘）。如果不依賴他人，只依賴自己生起無分別智，觀察法之真如，利益一切眾生而得出離的，稱為大乘（Mahayana）。然而，這大乘雖然也觀察過失，但其目的是爲了顯現求得一切智慧，度一切有情眾生，而不是爲了觀察過失本身，所以略而不說。雖然在因地時，獨覺菩薩也依賴他人，但因為他們的根性和證果后的習性只喜歡依賴自己，所以也略而不說。這裡，智慧指向自身所證之果，都是正因。所觀察的他人等，都是疏遠之緣。只是依據這兩種情況來說明三乘的差別，並非一切行為都相同。

論曰：應當瞭解乘的含義，以顯示其意義。

述曰：頌文中總說，而意義有差別，所以用這段長行文來說明相應的意義。

論曰：如果從他人聽聞而證悟，稱為聲聞乘（Sravaka-yana，小乘）；如果自己證悟，稱為獨覺乘；如果發菩提心，利益自己和他人，稱為無上乘（Anuttara-yana，大乘）。

述曰：三乘的差別如文所述，容易理解。與前面的頌文相配。

論曰：已經說了乘的含義，接下來解釋他們所觀察的義理。

述曰：第一句是總說，下面三句是說明體性。其中有五個『若』。前面三個『若』是有為法，後面兩個『若』是無為法。

論曰：應當瞭解，這裡假立的，是指名稱等。

述曰：在不相應行法中，名稱最為殊勝，能夠總攝諸法。舉出名稱，就包括了其餘一切假法。然而瓶子等法，不是獨立的蘊法，雖然是假法，但不在此說明。舊論中說，有言說、名稱、語句、味道等，這是不對的，因為不是一切不相應行法都有言說。

論曰：因，是指種子所攝的阿賴耶識（Alaya-vijnana，藏識）。

述曰：無論是現行還是種子，都可以稱為因。

論曰：相，是指器世界、身體以及受用之物。

述曰：體性和相貌容易理解，所以稱為相。器世界，是指山河大地等。身體，是指五根和四大所組成的身體。受用之物，是指五欲的資具。這裡不區分是什麼識所變現，但這些種類都包含在此處。

論曰：以及轉識所攝的作意和思惟。

【English Translation】 English version: That which attains liberation through observing faults and wisdom is called the Pratyekabuddha-yana (Solitary Realizer Vehicle). If one does not rely on others but solely relies on oneself to generate non-discriminating wisdom, observing the suchness of Dharma, benefiting all beings, and attaining liberation, it is called the Mahayana (Great Vehicle). However, although this Mahayana also observes faults, its purpose is to manifest the seeking of all wisdom and to liberate all sentient beings, not for the sake of observing faults themselves, so it is briefly not discussed. Although in the causal stage, Pratyekabuddhas also rely on others, because their nature and the habits after attaining the fruit only like to rely on themselves, so it is also briefly not discussed. Here, wisdom pointing to the fruit attained by oneself is the direct cause. What is observed, such as others, are distant conditions. The difference between the three vehicles is explained based on these two situations, not that all actions are the same.

Treatise says: One should understand the meaning of 'vehicle' in order to reveal its significance.

Commentary says: The verse speaks generally, but the meaning has differences, so this long passage is used to explain the corresponding meaning.

Treatise says: If one attains enlightenment by hearing from others, it is called the Sravaka-yana (Hearer Vehicle); if one attains enlightenment by oneself, it is called the Pratyekabuddha-yana; if one generates Bodhicitta (the mind of enlightenment), benefiting oneself and others, it is called the Anuttara-yana (Unsurpassed Vehicle, i.e., Mahayana).

Commentary says: The differences between the three vehicles are as described in the text and are easy to understand. It corresponds to the previous verses.

Treatise says: Having spoken of the meaning of 'vehicle', next explain the meaning of what they observe.

Commentary says: The first sentence is a general statement, and the following three sentences explain the essence. Among them, there are five 'if's. The first three 'if's are conditioned dharmas (phenomena), and the last two 'if's are unconditioned dharmas.

Treatise says: One should understand that what is provisionally established here refers to names, etc.

Commentary says: Among the non-associated formations, name is the most excellent, capable of encompassing all dharmas. Mentioning name includes all other provisional dharmas. However, things like bottles are not independent aggregates, although they are provisional, they are not discussed here. The old treatise says that there are speech, names, sentences, tastes, etc., which is incorrect, because not all non-associated formations have speech.

Treatise says: Cause refers to the Alaya-vijnana (store consciousness) contained by seeds.

Commentary says: Whether manifest or seeds, both can be called cause.

Treatise says: Appearance refers to the container world, the body, and the objects of enjoyment.

Commentary says: The essence and appearance are easy to understand, so it is called appearance. The container world refers to mountains, rivers, and the earth. The body refers to the body composed of the five roots and the four great elements. The objects of enjoyment refer to the resources of the five desires. Here, it is not distinguished by which consciousness it is transformed, but these kinds are all included here.

Treatise says: And the attending (意取) and thinking (思惟) included in the transforming consciousness.

述曰。相猶未盡論說及言。此是因余故言轉識攝。一意舊言心。二取三思惟。舊言分別。此非也。

論曰。意謂恒時至一切境故。

述曰。七五六識如次應知。舊論云。第六識名分別。以具三分別故。今勘梵本。無此言也。但言思惟。尋度思惟語言行故。此中不言心所法者。以但舉王即兼臣故。或復第八唯舉其境不說其見。相易知見難知。七五六識不舉其境。識易知故。上來論無婁有。此說無心所者。心之品故。

論曰。如是若假至總名有為。

述曰。此結上明有為諸法。此言相應法。即攝心等。以七識等體相易知。雖總名相。與器等法行相異故。於此結中別言及相應法。

論曰。若寂靜者至所緣境故。

述曰。擇滅無為寂靜息諠雜故。真如不爾。故別處說。余義可知。

論曰。如是所說至總名無為。

述曰。總結上也。然舊論文無所觀義。又說能寂名寂靜境。此說非也。然能證道以為主故。總攝一切無漏有為。此言無為者。非業煩惱之所為故。然此可說通有無為。如對法第二卷。

論曰。應知此中至名蘊等善巧。

述曰。上來已說蘊等十境。自下第二緣此智名為善巧。

論曰。真實總義至所顯真實。

述曰。自下大文第三攝上所明。總

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：窺基法師的《述記》說：『相』（laksana）似乎還沒有完全論述到言語和表達。這是因為之前的內容而轉到對『轉識』（pravrtti-vijnana）的攝取。一種觀點認為舊譯本將『意』（manas）譯為『心』（citta），將『取』（upadana）譯為『思惟』（cintana），舊譯本將『分別』（vikalpa）譯為『思惟』，這是不對的。

論中說：『意』之所以名為『意』，是因為它恒常地到達一切境界。

窺基法師的《述記》說：第七識（末那識，manas-vijnana）、第五識（眼識，caksu-vijnana）、第六識（意識，mano-vijnana）的含義應該依次瞭解。舊論中說：『第六識名為分別，因為它具有三種分別。』現在考察梵文版本，沒有這種說法，只說是『思惟』，因為它尋求、衡量、思惟語言行為。這裡沒有說心所法（caitta-dharma），是因為只舉了君王（心王）就兼顧了臣子（心所）。或者第八識（阿賴耶識，alaya-vijnana）只舉了它的境界（visaya），沒有說它的見分（darsana-bhaga），因為相分容易瞭解，見分難以瞭解。第七識、第五識、第六識沒有舉它們的境界，是因為識容易瞭解。上面的論述沒有遺漏，這裡說沒有心所，是因為它是心的品類。

論中說：像這樣，如果從假立到總合，就名為有為法（samskrta）。

窺基法師的《述記》說：這是總結上面所說的有為諸法。這裡說的相應法（samprayukta-dharma），就包括了心等。因為七識等的體相容易瞭解，雖然總名為相，但與器世間等法的行相不同，所以在這個總結中特別說了『及相應法』。

論中說：如果說是寂靜（nirvana）的，是因為所緣境（alambana-visaya）的緣故。

窺基法師的《述記》說：擇滅無為（pratisamkhya-nirodha）是寂靜的，因為它止息了喧雜。真如（tathata）不是這樣，所以在別處說。其餘的含義可以瞭解。

論中說：像這樣所說的，總名為無為（asamskrta）。

窺基法師的《述記》說：這是總結上面所說的。然而舊的論文沒有所觀的含義，又說能寂靜的名為寂靜境，這種說法是不對的。然而能證得道是作為主要的，所以總攝一切無漏有為法（anāsrava-saṃskṛta-dharma）。這裡說無為，是因為不是業和煩惱所造作的。然而這可以說通於有為和無為，如《對法論》第二卷所說。

論中說：應該知道這裡所說的，名為蘊（skandha）等善巧（kausalya）。

窺基法師的《述記》說：上面已經說了蘊等十種境界，從下面開始，第二種緣於此的智慧名為善巧。

論中說：真實總義，是爲了所顯示的真實。

窺基法師的《述記》說：從下面開始，大的科判第三，總攝上面所說明的內容。

【English Translation】 English version: The Shuji (Commentary) by Kuiji states: 『Laksana』 (characteristics) seems not to have fully discussed speech and expression. This is because of the previous content, which turns to the inclusion of 『pravrtti-vijnana』 (evolving consciousness). One view holds that the old translation translated 『manas』 (mind) as 『citta』 (heart-mind), and 『upadana』 (grasping) as 『cintana』 (thinking). The old translation translated 『vikalpa』 (discrimination) as 『thinking,』 which is incorrect.

The treatise states: 『Manas』 is so named because it constantly reaches all realms.

Kuiji's Shuji states: The meanings of the seventh consciousness (manas-vijnana, mind-consciousness), the fifth consciousness (caksu-vijnana, eye-consciousness), and the sixth consciousness (mano-vijnana, mind-consciousness) should be understood in order. The old treatise says: 『The sixth consciousness is called discrimination because it has three kinds of discrimination.』 Now, examining the Sanskrit version, there is no such statement, only 『thinking,』 because it seeks, measures, and thinks about linguistic actions. It does not mention caitta-dharma (mental factors) here because mentioning the king (mind-king) includes the ministers (mental factors). Or the eighth consciousness (alaya-vijnana, storehouse consciousness) only mentions its visaya (object), not mentioning its darsana-bhaga (seeing-aspect), because the laksana-bhaga (characteristic-aspect) is easy to understand, while the darsana-bhaga is difficult to understand. The seventh, fifth, and sixth consciousnesses do not mention their objects because consciousness is easy to understand. The above discussion has no omissions, and it says here that there are no mental factors because it is a category of mind.

The treatise states: Like this, if from the provisional to the aggregate, it is called samskrta (conditioned).

Kuiji's Shuji states: This summarizes the conditioned dharmas mentioned above. The samprayukta-dharma (associated dharmas) mentioned here include the mind, etc. Because the essence and characteristics of the seven consciousnesses, etc., are easy to understand, although the general name is laksana (characteristic), their behavior is different from that of the physical world, etc. Therefore, in this summary, 『and associated dharmas』 are specifically mentioned.

The treatise states: If it is said to be nirvana (quiescence), it is because of the alambana-visaya (object of support).

Kuiji's Shuji states: Pratisamkhya-nirodha (cessation through wisdom) is quiescent because it stops the noise and confusion. Tathata (suchness) is not like this, so it is said elsewhere. The remaining meanings can be understood.

The treatise states: What is said in this way is generally called asamskrta (unconditioned).

Kuiji's Shuji states: This summarizes what was said above. However, the old treatise does not have the meaning of what is observed, and it also says that what can be quiescent is called the quiescent realm, which is incorrect. However, being able to attain the path is the main thing, so it encompasses all anāsrava-saṃskṛta-dharma (untainted conditioned dharmas). It is said here to be unconditioned because it is not created by karma and afflictions. However, this can be said to apply to both conditioned and unconditioned, as stated in the second volume of the Abhidharmakosa.

The treatise states: It should be known that what is said here is called skandha (aggregate) and other kausalya (skillful means).

Kuiji's Shuji states: The ten realms such as the aggregates have already been mentioned above. From below, the second kind of wisdom based on this is called skillful means.

The treatise states: The true general meaning is for the truth that is revealed.

Kuiji's Shuji states: From below, the third major division summarizes what was explained above.

結合解體無增減說十所由。

論曰。能顯真實至所顯示故。

述曰。總能顯。別從總顯。故成二也。

論曰。所顯九者一離增上慢所顯真實。

述曰。舊論所顯后十。慢謂獨覺乘出離故。今說即同聲聞。分別生故。即相真實。知所執無依他妄有。離增上慢。

論曰。二對治顛倒所顯真實。

述曰。三無常等無倒真實治四倒故。

論曰。三聲聞乘至細能解脫故。

述曰。因果四諦真實。是聲聞出離粗細二諦真實。大乘出離由俗粗故。能成熟有情行利他行。由勝義細故。能自解脫行自利行。非聲聞乘有如是事。故各別也。舊論云。粗熟有情及法。細解脫眾生及法。皆非。

論曰。五能伏他論至顯了大乘所顯真實。

述曰。極成實中證成道理依喻道理成所說義。能降伏他。二凈所行名顯大乘。二障雙斷成大乘故。

論曰。入一切所知所顯真實。

述曰。即攝真實。一切所知不過五事。以三攝五令解於五。故立入名。

論曰。八顯不虛妄真如所顯真實。

述曰。即差別實七種真如。

論曰。九入我執事一切秘密所顯真實。

述曰。即十善巧實蘊等我見名我執。我執即事名我執事。一切秘密即四秘密。即對治等為解除我執

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本結合解脫無增減的十個原因。

論曰：能夠顯現真實，直至所顯示之真實故。

述曰：總的來說能夠顯現，分別從總的顯現。因此成為二者。

論曰：所顯現的九種真實是：一、遠離增上慢所顯現的真實。

述曰：舊論所顯現的是后十種。增上慢是指獨覺乘的出離。現在說（的遠離增上慢）與聲聞乘相同，因為是分別產生的。即是相真實，知道所執著的無依他，是虛妄的。遠離增上慢。

論曰：二、對治顛倒所顯現的真實。

述曰：三無常等無顛倒的真實，能對治四顛倒。

論曰：三、聲聞乘乃至細微處能夠解脫故。

述曰：因果四諦的真實，是聲聞乘出離粗細二諦的真實。大乘的出離，因為世俗諦粗略，能夠成熟有情，行利他行；因為勝義諦精細，能夠自我解脫，行自利行。聲聞乘沒有這樣的能力，所以各有區別。舊論說：粗略的成熟有情及法，細微的解脫眾生及法，都是不對的。

論曰：五、能夠降伏其他論點，乃至顯現了大乘所顯現的真實。

述曰：在極其真實的實性中，用證成的道理，依靠比喻的道理，成就所說的意義，能夠降伏他人。二凈所行名為顯大乘，二障雙斷成就大乘。

論曰：入一切所知所顯現的真實。

述曰：即是攝取真實。一切所知不超過五事（五蘊）。用三（三自性）來攝取五（五蘊），使人理解五蘊，所以立名為『入』。

論曰：八、顯現不虛妄真如所顯現的真實。

述曰：即是差別實性的七種真如。

論曰：九、入我執事一切秘密所顯現的真實。

述曰：即是十善巧實蘊等我見，名為我執。我執即事，名為我執事。一切秘密即四秘密。即對治等，是爲了解除我執。

【English Translation】 English version Combined with the ten reasons for the absence of increase or decrease in dissolution.

Treatise states: It is able to reveal the truth, up to the truth that is revealed.

Commentary states: Generally, it is able to reveal; specifically, it reveals from the general. Therefore, it becomes two.

Treatise states: The nine truths revealed are: 1. The truth revealed by being free from the conceit of superiority (增上慢, zēng shàng màn).

Commentary states: The old treatise reveals the latter ten. Conceit refers to the liberation of the Pratyekabuddha vehicle. The current statement (of being free from the conceit of superiority) is the same as the Śrāvakayāna (聲聞乘), because it arises from discrimination. It is the reality of characteristics, knowing that what is clung to is without dependence and is falsely existent. It is being free from the conceit of superiority.

Treatise states: 2. The truth revealed by counteracting perversions.

Commentary states: The truth of the three impermanences (三無常, sān wú cháng) and so on, without perversion, counteracts the four perversions (四倒, sì dǎo).

Treatise states: 3. The Śrāvakayāna (聲聞乘) can liberate even in subtle aspects.

Commentary states: The truth of the Four Noble Truths (四諦, sì dì) of cause and effect is the truth of the Śrāvakayāna's liberation from the coarse and subtle two truths. The Mahāyāna's (大乘) liberation, because the conventional truth is coarse, can mature sentient beings and perform altruistic actions; because the ultimate truth is subtle, it can liberate oneself and perform self-benefiting actions. The Śrāvakayāna does not have such abilities, so they are different. The old treatise says: The coarse matures sentient beings and dharmas, and the subtle liberates beings and dharmas, which is incorrect.

Treatise states: 5. It can subdue other arguments, even revealing the truth revealed by the Mahāyāna.

Commentary states: In the extremely real reality, using the reasoning of proof and relying on the reasoning of analogy, the meaning of what is said is accomplished, and it can subdue others. The conduct of the two purities is called revealing the Mahāyāna, because the dual obscurations are simultaneously severed, accomplishing the Mahāyāna.

Treatise states: Entering the truth revealed by all that is knowable.

Commentary states: This is grasping the truth. All that is knowable does not exceed the five aggregates (五蘊, wǔ yùn). Using the three (three natures) to grasp the five (five aggregates), enabling people to understand the five aggregates, hence the name 'entering' is established.

Treatise states: 8. Revealing the truth revealed by non-illusory Suchness (真如, zhēn rú).

Commentary states: This is the seven kinds of Suchness of differentiated reality.

Treatise states: 9. Entering the truth revealed by all the secrets of the object of self-grasping.

Commentary states: This is the view of self in the ten skillful real aggregates, etc., called self-grasping (我執, wǒ zhí). Self-grasping is the object, called the object of self-grasping. All secrets are the four secrets. That is, the counteractions, etc., are to eliminate self-grasping.

入一切秘密。說十善巧治我見。故名對治秘密。令入正法名令入秘密。如是隨義。如攝大乘對法等說。或我執者。謂十我見事者。即見所依事。謂蘊等十法為入解此我執所依之事及一切秘密故。十善巧真實也。舊論所顯后十。準義。知非以有能顯別為一故唯十真實。故知非也。

辯修對治品

染善相翻。稱之為對。善巧除染立以治名。此非自生。要習方起。是故名修對治品也。

論曰。已辯真實至菩提分法。

述曰。此品有三。初結前生后標品所明。次此中下正明覺分。三修對治總義下結前修義。此即初也。對治者何。即修一切菩提分法出對治體。然對治更有眾多。此廣攝余故但此。

論曰。此中先應說修念住。

述曰。此下第二正明覺分。於此品中有十四頌。合分為二。初十二頌別明道品。第十三十四頌明修覺分差別之相。十二頌中合分為六。初一頌明修念住。次一頌明修正斷。次四頌明修神足。次有二頌明修根力。以總解根力已。別有半頌。總明根力位。故不分根力以成二門。次有二頌明修覺支。次有二頌明修道支。然則七位覺分雖復不同。創修治道先修念住。對法第十卷說。是故最初為正觀察真實事相。建立念住。如彼廣說。故先說此。于中有二。初總簡持生下所明。后

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：進入一切秘密（指甚深的佛法）。宣說十善巧（dashashilakaushalya，指十種巧妙的方法）來對治我見（satkayadrishti，認為五蘊為我的錯誤見解），因此稱為對治秘密。使眾生進入正法稱為令入秘密。像這樣隨順意義，如《攝大乘論》（Mahāyānasaṃgraha）對法等所說。或者說，執著於我的人，是指十種我見的事，也就是見所依的事。認為蘊等十法是入解此我執所依之事以及一切秘密的方便，所以說十善巧是真實的。舊論所顯示的后十種，按照意義，知道不是因為有能顯示差別而成為一種，所以只有十種真實。因此知道不是這樣的。

辯修對治品

染污和善良相互對立，稱之為『對』。善巧去除染污，建立『治』的名稱。這並非自然產生，需要通過修習才能生起，所以稱為『修對治品』。

論曰：已經辨析了真實直到菩提分法（bodhipaksa-dharma，三十七道品）。

述曰：此品有三個部分。首先總結前面並引出後面，標明此品所要闡明的內容。其次，從『此中下正明覺分』開始，正式闡明覺分（bodhyaṅga，菩提分的別名）。第三，從『三修對治總義下結前修義』開始，總結前面的修習意義。這裡是第一個部分。對治是什麼？就是修習一切菩提分法，從而產生對治的本體。然而，對治還有很多種。這裡廣泛地涵蓋了其餘的對治，所以只說這些。

論曰：這裡首先應當說修念住（smṛtyupasthāna，四念住）。

述曰：從這裡開始是第二個部分，正式闡明覺分。在此品中有十四頌，總共分為兩部分。最初的十二頌分別闡明道品（marga，通往解脫的道路）。第十三和十四頌闡明修習覺分的不同相狀。十二頌中又可以分為六個部分。第一頌闡明修習念住。第二頌闡明修正斷（samyak-prahana，四正勤）。第三到第六頌闡明修習神足（riddhi-pada，四神足）。接下來有兩頌闡明修習根力（indriya-bala，五根五力）。因為已經總體解釋了根力，另外還有半頌總體闡明根力的位次，所以沒有將根力分為兩門。接下來有兩頌闡明修習覺支（bodhyanga，七覺支）。接下來有兩頌闡明修習道支（marga-anga，八正道）。雖然七個位次的覺分各不相同，但最初修習對治之道，首先要修習念住。《對法論》（Abhidharma）第十卷說，因此最初要爲了正確觀察真實事相，建立念住。如那裡廣泛所說，所以首先說這個。其中分為兩個部分。首先是『總簡持生下所明』，然後是...

【English Translation】 English version: Entering all secrets (referring to profound Buddhist teachings). Explaining the ten skillful means (dashashilakaushalya, referring to ten skillful methods) to counteract the view of self (satkayadrishti, the mistaken view of considering the five aggregates as self), hence it is called 'counteracting secrets'. Causing beings to enter the correct Dharma is called 'causing entry into secrets'. Thus, according to the meaning, as explained in texts like the Mahāyānasaṃgraha and Abhidharma. Or, those who are attached to self refer to the ten aspects of the view of self, which are the basis of that view. Considering the ten dharmas such as the aggregates as a means to enter and understand the basis of this attachment to self and all secrets, therefore it is said that the ten skillful means are real. The latter ten that are shown in the old treatises, according to the meaning, are known not to be one because there is the ability to show differences, so only ten are real. Therefore, it is known that it is not like that.

Chapter on Discriminating and Cultivating Countermeasures

Defilement and goodness are mutually opposed, and this is called 'counter'. Skillfully removing defilement establishes the name 'measure'. This does not arise spontaneously; it must arise through practice, so it is called the 'Chapter on Cultivating Countermeasures'.

Treatise says: Having already discriminated reality up to the factors of enlightenment (bodhipaksa-dharma, the thirty-seven factors of enlightenment).

Commentary says: This chapter has three parts. First, it summarizes the previous and introduces the following, marking what this chapter will clarify. Second, starting from 'From here down, the correct explanation of the factors of enlightenment', it formally explains the factors of enlightenment (bodhyaṅga, another name for the factors of enlightenment). Third, starting from 'Third, the general meaning of cultivating countermeasures concludes the meaning of the previous cultivation', it summarizes the meaning of the previous cultivation. This is the first part. What is a countermeasure? It is cultivating all the factors of enlightenment, thereby producing the essence of the countermeasure. However, there are many kinds of countermeasures. This broadly encompasses the rest, so only these are mentioned.

Treatise says: Here, one should first speak of cultivating mindfulness (smṛtyupasthāna, the four foundations of mindfulness).

Commentary says: From here begins the second part, formally explaining the factors of enlightenment. In this chapter, there are fourteen verses, divided into two parts. The first twelve verses separately explain the path factors (marga, the path to liberation). Verses thirteen and fourteen explain the different aspects of cultivating the factors of enlightenment. The twelve verses can be divided into six parts. The first verse explains cultivating mindfulness. The second verse explains cultivating right effort (samyak-prahana, the four right exertions). Verses three to six explain cultivating the bases of spiritual power (riddhi-pada, the four bases of spiritual power). Next, there are two verses explaining cultivating the roots and powers (indriya-bala, the five roots and five powers). Because the roots and powers have already been generally explained, and there is also a half-verse generally explaining the positions of the roots and powers, the roots and powers are not divided into two sections. Next, there are two verses explaining cultivating the enlightenment factors (bodhyanga, the seven factors of enlightenment). Next, there are two verses explaining cultivating the path factors (marga-anga, the eightfold noble path). Although the factors of enlightenment in the seven positions are different, to initially cultivate the path of countermeasures, one must first cultivate mindfulness. The tenth volume of the Abhidharma says that, therefore, one must first establish mindfulness in order to correctly observe the true nature of reality. As explained extensively there, so this is discussed first. It is divided into two parts. First is 'Generally summarizing and holding what is explained below', and then...

頌曰下依舉正釋。此即初也。

論頌曰。以粗重愛因至修念住應知。

述曰。上二句頌明念住所治。下二句頌明修念住意。

論曰。粗重由身至入苦聖諦。

述曰。有漏粗重由身顯之。以觀于身知粗重故。身知粗重故。身為苦果故。觀入苦諦。對法第十說。所有色身皆行苦相粗重所顯。故觀于身正斷粗重。

論曰。身以有粗重諸行為相故。

述曰。釋粗重由身故。

論曰。以諸粗至有漏皆苦。

述曰。粗重者。不調柔異名。有漏色身以有此粗重諸行而為體相。即是行苦故觀為苦。對法雲。是故修觀行時治此。輕安於身生故。然粗重有唯染。有通異熟。有通無漏。如瑜伽第二唯識抄會。

論曰。諸有漏受至入集聖諦。

述曰。對法同此。文易可知。然前解諦中。受是苦諦。何故今觀入于集諦。所望別故。若望熟因即是苦諦。若生愛義觀入集諦。集之因故。愛是受果。觀應入苦。如此徴難如理應思。

論曰。心是我執至入滅聖諦。

述曰。心是我執所依所緣之自體事。觀知此心我見便斷。故入滅諦。

論曰。怖我斷滅由斯離故。

述曰。未證滅諦。我見恒生。修道求滅。常恐我斷。今觀於心是我執事。我見既斷。怖畏亦無。由斯

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：頌文解釋瞭如何依據經文來正確地理解和闡釋。這便是最初的含義。

論中的頌文說：『通過對粗重愛因的觀察，直至修習念住，應當知曉其含義。』

註釋說：上面的兩句頌文闡明了念住所要對治的對象。下面的兩句頌文闡明了修習念住的意義。

論中說：『粗重由身體顯現，直至進入苦聖諦（Dukkha Satya）。』

註釋說：有漏的粗重通過身體來顯現。因為通過觀察身體，可以瞭解粗重。瞭解身體的粗重，是因為身體是苦的果報。因此，觀察身體可以進入苦諦。《對法》第十卷說：『所有色身都顯現出由行苦的粗重所帶來的相狀。』因此，觀察身體可以正確地斷除粗重。

論中說：『身體以具有粗重諸行為其相狀。』

註釋說：這是爲了解釋粗重由身體顯現的原因。

論中說：『因為所有的粗重都與有漏有關，所以都是苦。』

註釋說：粗重是『不調柔』的另一種說法。有漏的色身以具有這種粗重諸行為其體相，這便是行苦，因此應觀其為苦。《對法》中說：『因此，在修觀行時，要對治這種粗重，從而使輕安在身體中產生。』然而，粗重有的僅僅是染污，有的則通於異熟，有的則通於無漏。正如《瑜伽師地論》第二卷和《唯識抄會》中所說。

論中說：『所有的有漏感受，直至進入集聖諦（Samudaya Satya）。』

註釋說：《對法》中的說法與此相同，文義容易理解。然而，前面在解釋諦的時候，感受是苦諦，為什麼現在觀察感受卻進入集諦呢？這是因為所期望的不同。如果從成熟的因果來看，那就是苦諦；如果從產生愛的意義來看，那就是進入集諦，因為集是產生愛的原因。愛是感受的果報，觀察愛應該進入苦諦。這樣的疑問應該如理思維。

論中說：『心是我執的所依和所緣，直至進入滅聖諦（Nirodha Satya）。』

註釋說：心是我執所依賴和所緣的自體事物。觀察並瞭解這個心，我見便會斷除，因此可以進入滅諦。

論中說：『因為遠離了對自我斷滅的恐懼。』

註釋說：未證得滅諦時，我見會恒常生起。修道以求滅，常常恐懼自我斷滅。現在觀察心是我執的所在，我見既然斷除，恐懼也就沒有了。因為這個原因

English version: The verse explains how to correctly understand and interpret based on the scriptures. This is the initial meaning.

The verse in the treatise says: 'Through observing the coarse and heavy causes of attachment, up to the practice of mindfulness, one should understand its meaning.'

The commentary says: The above two lines of the verse clarify what mindfulness practice aims to counteract. The following two lines of the verse clarify the meaning of practicing mindfulness.

The treatise says: 'Coarseness and heaviness are manifested by the body, leading to the entry into the Noble Truth of Suffering (Dukkha Satya).'

The commentary says: Defiled coarseness and heaviness are manifested through the body. Because by observing the body, one can understand coarseness and heaviness. Understanding the coarseness and heaviness of the body is because the body is the result of suffering. Therefore, observing the body can lead to the entry into the Truth of Suffering. The tenth chapter of the Abhidharma says: 'All physical bodies manifest the characteristics of being revealed by the coarseness and heaviness of suffering of formation.' Therefore, observing the body can correctly eliminate coarseness and heaviness.

The treatise says: 'The body has the characteristic of having coarse and heavy formations.'

The commentary says: This is to explain why coarseness and heaviness are manifested by the body.

The treatise says: 'Because all coarseness is related to defilements, all is suffering.'

The commentary says: Coarseness and heaviness are another name for 'lack of pliancy'. Defiled physical bodies have this coarseness and heaviness as their inherent characteristic, which is the suffering of formation, therefore it should be viewed as suffering. The Abhidharma says: 'Therefore, when practicing contemplation, one should counteract this, so that ease arises in the body.' However, some coarseness and heaviness are only defiled, some are related to maturation, and some are related to the undefiled. As stated in the second chapter of the Yogacarabhumi-sastra and the Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi-sastra.

The treatise says: 'All defiled feelings, leading to the entry into the Noble Truth of the Origin of Suffering (Samudaya Satya).'

The commentary says: The statement in the Abhidharma is the same as this, and the meaning is easy to understand. However, earlier when explaining the Truths, feeling was the Truth of Suffering, why is it that now observing feeling leads to the entry into the Truth of the Origin of Suffering? This is because what is expected is different. If viewed from the perspective of the cause of maturation, then it is the Truth of Suffering; if viewed from the meaning of generating attachment, then it is the entry into the Truth of the Origin of Suffering, because the origin is the cause of attachment. Attachment is the result of feeling, and observing attachment should lead to the entry into the Truth of Suffering. Such questions should be considered reasonably.

The treatise says: 'The mind is the basis and object of self-grasping, leading to the entry into the Noble Truth of the Cessation of Suffering (Nirodha Satya).'

The commentary says: The mind is the self-entity that self-grasping relies on and takes as its object. Observing and understanding this mind, the view of self will be eliminated, therefore one can enter the Truth of Cessation.

The treatise says: 'Because of being separated from the fear of the annihilation of self.'

The commentary says: When the Truth of Cessation has not been attained, the view of self will constantly arise. Cultivating the path to seek cessation, one is often afraid of the annihilation of self. Now observing the mind as the place where self-grasping resides, since the view of self has been eliminated, fear is also gone. Because of this reason

【English Translation】 The verse explains how to correctly understand and interpret based on the scriptures. This is the initial meaning.