跳轉到

T45n1855_三論游意義

大正藏第 45 冊 No. 1855 三論游意義

No. 1855

三論游意義

碩法師撰

略有開四重(一明經論游意。二明四論大歸。三明中觀宗者。四明無方問難也)。

第一明經論游意者。略明三種。一者明人論菩薩不同。二明諸經論不同。三者所化緣利鈍不同也。此即是佛菩薩因緣。經論因緣。能所因緣也。人即是釋迦作佛行化。若是龍樹即是菩薩行化。有佛應有菩薩。有菩薩應有佛。所次非菩薩。行化有佛即不菩薩。佛行化故。二智方便益物。以菩薩行化故。二慧被緣。二智益物。故所說名之為經。以二慧被緣故。所說被緣為論。所說被緣為論。即是破邪顯正也。所說名之為經故。即是二諦教門。以二諦教門。正是被緣故也。所被之緣。便稟二諦教。以教破緣故教是緣教。稟于教故緣是教緣。教是緣教故。教稱于緣。緣是教緣故。緣稱于教。教稱于緣故名為應感。緣稱于教故名為感應也。感應故說空有二諦。次應感故悟空有二不二。如是作益當時開悟一道所作已故。方便涅槃是名菩薩佛方便也。次有菩薩佛方便者。明諸佛去世必有菩薩興者。聖由日月為成就四生。是故在雖隱必有月興也。故諸佛去世便有菩薩。所以遠法師云。白日雖沒寢光。猶何系之朗

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 大正藏第 45 冊 No. 1855 三論游意義

No. 1855

三論游意義

碩法師 撰

略有開四重（一、明經論游意。二、明四論大歸。三、明中觀宗者。四、明無方問難也）。

第一明經論游意者。略明三種。一者明人論菩薩不同。二明諸經論不同。三者所化緣利鈍不同也。此即是佛菩薩因緣。經論因緣。能所因緣也。人即是釋迦（釋迦牟尼佛）作佛行化。若是龍樹（偉大的佛教哲學家）即是菩薩行化。有佛應有菩薩。有菩薩應有佛。所次非菩薩。行化有佛即不菩薩。佛行化故。二智方便益物。以菩薩行化故。二慧被緣。二智益物。故所說名之為經。以二慧被緣故。所說被緣為論。所說被緣為論。即是破邪顯正也。所說名之為經故。即是二諦（勝義諦和世俗諦）教門。以二諦教門。正是被緣故也。所被之緣。便稟二諦教。以教破緣故教是緣教。稟于教故緣是教緣。教是緣教故。教稱于緣。緣是教緣故。緣稱于教。教稱于緣故名為應感。緣稱于教故名為感應也。感應故說空有二諦。次應感故悟空有二不二。如是作益當時開悟一道所作已故。方便涅槃是名菩薩佛方便也。次有菩薩佛方便者。明諸佛去世必有菩薩興者。聖由日月為成就四生。是故在雖隱必有月興也。故諸佛去世便有菩薩。所以遠法師云。白日雖沒寢光。猶何系之朗

以下是將《大正藏》第45冊 No. 1855《三論游意義》的原文翻譯成現代漢語的內容：

大正藏第45冊 No. 1855

三論游意義

碩法師 撰

全文大略分為四大部分（一是闡明經論的游意義，二是說明四論的總體歸旨，三是闡明中觀宗的核心，四是說明無方問難的內容）。

第一部分：闡明經論游意

這一部分簡要說明三種情況：
1. 人和菩薩的論說不同
2. 各種經論的內容不同
3. 所教化的因緣和對象的智慧敏銳程度不同

這三者分別對應佛和菩薩的因緣、經論的因緣，以及能化與所化的因緣。
所謂「人」，指的是釋迦牟尼佛以佛的身份教化眾生。而如果是龍樹（著名佛教哲學家），則是以菩薩的身份教化眾生。有佛就應當有菩薩，有菩薩也應當有佛。如果不是菩薩的次序（即沒有菩薩的角色），那麼教化由佛來完成，就沒有菩薩的參與。佛通過教化，以「二智」（遍知一切的智慧和方便智慧）利益眾生；而菩薩通過教化，則以「二慧」（智慧和慈悲）影響因緣，用「二智」利益眾生。因此，佛所說的教法被稱為「經」。因為菩薩以「二慧」影響因緣，他所說的教法就成為「論」。
「論」是針對因緣而說，目的是破除邪見、彰顯正道。而「經」的名稱，則體現的是「二諦教門」（世俗諦和勝義諦）。因為「二諦教門」正是針對因緣而設立的。
被教化的因緣（即眾生），接受了「二諦」的教導。因為教法是爲了破除因緣中的迷惑，所以教法是因緣的教法；眾生接受教法，所以因緣是教法的因緣。教法是因緣的教法，因此教法與因緣相適應；因緣是教法的因緣，因此因緣與教法相呼應。
教法與因緣相適應，稱為「應感」；因緣與教法相呼應，稱為「感應」。
由於「感應」的關係，就宣講了「空」和「有」的二諦；由於「應感」的關係，眾生得以覺悟「空」和「有」並非二元對立（即二諦不二）。這樣，通過當時開悟一道路的利益已經達成，運用方便法門達到涅槃，這被稱為菩薩和佛的方便之道。

後續部分：菩薩與佛的方便

接下來提到，有菩薩和佛的方便之道時，是爲了說明諸佛去世后，必然會有菩薩興起。聖人以日月為象徵，成就四種生命（胎生、卵生、濕生、化生）。因此，即使太陽隱沒，也必然有月亮升起。同樣，諸佛去世后，就會有菩薩出現。所以遠法師曾說：「白日雖然落山，餘光仍然明亮，又何須拘泥於此呢？」

翻譯說明

  1. 語言風格：儘量用流暢的現代漢語表達，避免過於古雅的詞彙，同時保留原文的邏輯和佛教術語的準確性（如「二諦」「二智」「二慧」等）。
  2. 未譯完的部分：原文未完全展開，後續部分（如「四論大歸」「中觀宗」等）未提供具體內容，因此只翻譯了提供的前半部分。
  3. 佛教術語：保留了「經」「論」「二諦」「涅槃」等術語，並加以括號解釋，確保現代讀者理解。

如果你需要進一步翻譯或補充完整內容，請提供更多原文或具體要求！

【English Translation】 English version: Taisho Tripitaka Volume 45 No. 1855 Essays on the Meaning of the Three Treatises

No. 1855

Essays on the Meaning of the Three Treatises

Composed by Dharma Master Shuo

Briefly, there are four aspects to be discussed: (1) Clarifying the purpose of studying the sutras and treatises; (2) Explaining the grand synthesis of the Four Treatises; (3) Elucidating the Madhyamaka (Middle Way) school; (4) Addressing unrestricted questions and challenges.

Firstly, clarifying the purpose of studying the sutras and treatises involves three aspects: (1) Distinguishing between the actions of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas; (2) Differentiating among various sutras and treatises; (3) Recognizing the varying capacities (sharpness and dullness) of those being taught. This concerns the causes and conditions of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, the causes and conditions of sutras and treatises, and the causes and conditions of the teachers and the taught. 'People' refers to Shakyamuni (Shakyamuni Buddha) acting as a Buddha to transform beings. If it is Nagarjuna (great Buddhist philosopher), it is a Bodhisattva acting to transform beings. Where there is a Buddha, there should be a Bodhisattva; where there is a Bodhisattva, there should be a Buddha. Therefore, it is not the Bodhisattva. Acting to transform beings, if there is a Buddha, then it is not a Bodhisattva, because the Buddha is acting to transform beings. The two wisdoms (智) skillfully benefit beings. Because the Bodhisattva acts to transform beings, the two kinds of wisdom (慧) are bestowed upon those with whom they have a connection. The two wisdoms benefit beings. Therefore, what is spoken is called a 'sutra'. Because the two wisdoms are bestowed upon those with whom they have a connection, what is spoken and received is called a 'treatise'. What is spoken and received as a treatise is to refute the heterodox and reveal the orthodox. What is spoken is called a 'sutra'; therefore, it is the teaching of the two truths (conventional truth and ultimate truth). Because the teaching of the two truths is precisely for those with whom they have a connection. Those with whom they have a connection receive the teaching of the two truths. Because the teaching refutes the connection, the teaching is the cause of the connection. Because they rely on the teaching, the connection is the condition of the teaching. Because the teaching is the cause of the connection, the teaching corresponds to the connection. Because the connection is the condition of the teaching, the connection corresponds to the teaching. Because the teaching corresponds to the connection, it is called 'response to the potential'. Because the connection corresponds to the teaching, it is called 'interaction of influence'. Because of this interaction, the two truths of emptiness and existence are taught. Next, because of responding to the potential, one understands the non-duality of emptiness and existence. Thus, the benefit of awakening to the one path at that time is accomplished. The expedient of Nirvana is called the expedient of the Bodhisattva Buddha. Next, the expedient of the Bodhisattva Buddha clarifies that when the Buddhas pass away, there must be Bodhisattvas arising. The sages rely on the sun and moon to accomplish the four kinds of birth. Therefore, even though the sun is hidden, the moon will surely rise. Therefore, when the Buddhas pass away, there will be Bodhisattvas. Therefore, Dharma Master Yuan said, 'Although the white sun has set and its light is hidden, what still connects us to its brightness?'

月。所以有龍樹興也。但末世鈍根。聞有作有解故。有住于有。不識有非有。聞無作無解故。無住于無。不識無非無。既住有住無。不不識有非有無非無。亦不識有無非非有非非無。是故既告不二。亦失於二。既失理故失於教。如是二不二皆失。故理教皆失。但成斷常虛忘故。序云。上聖為之流滯大士所以棲惶。是龍樹出世。破眾生斷常諸見故。明不斷不常即是中實。既識于中。方了諸佛假名因緣空有二諦也。此之假名二諦。即是不生不滅乃至無來無去也。是故假名二諦即是八不。所以瓔珞經云。二諦者。不生不滅乃至無來無去也。今龍樹。為破斷常迷錯申空有二諦。還使眾生識于空有二諦即是悟不二。如是作益當時同表一道。菩薩出世大意為如此也。問云。何是經通經別論通論別。答如來始自鹿苑終訖雙林。說雖有十二部經八萬八千法藏。推其大歸。皆為息眾生虛妄顛倒開一道耳。是眾經通也。

所言經別者。如來謂大小二種根緣故。開生滅無生滅二種方便觀也。若是大小之緣。說無生滅生滅方便。若大小之緣。開生滅無生滅方便。此是經別意也。次言論通別者。佛滅度后。傳持法藏有二十三人。併爲破于邪見迷開申正教也。破邪迷即是符提弱喪也。開申正教即是報佛恩故也。眾論雖多同爲此意。是論通也。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 所以才有了龍樹（Nāgārjuna，印度佛教哲學家）的出現。但末世的遲鈍根器之人，聽聞『有』就執著于『有』的解釋，因此停留在『有』的觀念里，不認識『有』並非絕對的『有』。聽聞『無』就執著于『無』的解釋，因此停留在『無』的觀念里，不認識『無』並非絕對的『無』。既然執著于『有』和『無』，就不認識『有』非『有』、『無』非『無』的道理，也不認識『有』和『無』既不是單純的『有』和『無』，也不是非『有』非『無』的道理。因此，即使告訴他們不二法門，也失去了對『二』的理解。既然失去了對『理』的理解，也就失去了對『教』的理解。像這樣，『二』和『不二』都失去了，最終只會形成斷見、常見以及虛妄的觀念。所以序文說，『上聖因此感到困頓，大士因此感到棲惶』。這就是龍樹出世的意義，爲了破除眾生斷見和常見的各種見解，闡明『不斷不常』才是中道實相。認識了中道，才能明白諸佛所說的假名、因緣、空有二諦。這假名二諦，就是不生不滅，乃至無來無去。所以假名二諦就是八不（不生不滅、不常不斷、不一不異、不來不去）。因此，《瓔珞經》說：『二諦就是不生不滅，乃至無來無去』。現在龍樹爲了破除斷常的迷惑，闡述空有二諦，使眾生認識到空有二諦就是悟入不二法門。這樣做對當時的人們有益，共同彰顯唯一的真道。菩薩出世的大意就是這樣。

問：什麼是經的通義和別義？什麼是論的通義和別義？ 答：如來佛從最初在鹿野苑（Sārnāth，釋迦牟尼初轉法輪之地）開始，到最後在雙林（Kushinagar，佛陀涅槃之地）圓寂，所說的雖然有十二部經和八萬四千法藏，但推究其根本宗旨，都是爲了止息眾生虛妄顛倒的念頭，開啟唯一的真道。這就是眾經的通義。

所謂經的別義，是指如來佛爲了適應大小兩種根器的眾生，開示生滅和無生滅兩種方便的觀法。如果是大根器和小根器的因緣，就說無生滅和生滅的方便法門。如果是大根器和小根器的因緣，就開示生滅和無生滅的方便法門。這就是經的別義。接下來所說的論的通義和別義，是指佛陀滅度后，傳承和護持法藏的有二十三位論師，他們都是爲了破除邪見和迷惑，闡明正教。破除邪見和迷惑，就是扶持衰弱的佛法。闡明正教，就是報答佛恩。眾多的論著雖然各有不同，但都爲了這個目的。這就是論的通義。

【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, Nāgārjuna (Indian Buddhist philosopher) arose. However, in the degenerate age, those with dull faculties, upon hearing of 'existence,' cling to the interpretation of 'existence,' thus dwelling in the concept of 'existence,' not recognizing that 'existence' is not absolute 'existence.' Upon hearing of 'non-existence,' they cling to the interpretation of 'non-existence,' thus dwelling in the concept of 'non-existence,' not recognizing that 'non-existence' is not absolute 'non-existence.' Since they cling to 'existence' and 'non-existence,' they do not recognize the principle that 'existence' is not merely 'existence' and 'non-existence' is not merely 'non-existence,' nor do they recognize that 'existence' and 'non-existence' are neither simply 'existence' and 'non-existence' nor non-'existence' and non-'non-existence.' Therefore, even if they are told about non-duality, they lose the understanding of 'duality.' Since they lose the understanding of 'principle,' they also lose the understanding of 'teaching.' In this way, both 'duality' and 'non-duality' are lost, ultimately leading only to views of annihilationism, eternalism, and delusion. Therefore, the preface says, 'The supreme sages are perplexed by it, and the great bodhisattvas are dismayed by it.' This is the significance of Nāgārjuna's appearance in the world, to dispel the various views of annihilationism and eternalism held by sentient beings, and to clarify that 'neither annihilation nor eternity' is the Middle Way reality. By recognizing the Middle Way, one can understand the provisional names, conditions, and the Two Truths of emptiness and existence spoken of by the Buddhas. These provisional names and Two Truths are none other than non-arising and non-ceasing, and even non-coming and non-going. Therefore, the provisional names and Two Truths are the Eight Negations (neither arising nor ceasing, neither permanent nor impermanent, neither one nor different, neither coming nor going). Therefore, the Yingluo Jing (瓔珞經) says: 'The Two Truths are neither arising nor ceasing, and even neither coming nor going.' Now, Nāgārjuna elucidates the Two Truths of emptiness and existence in order to dispel the delusion of annihilationism and eternalism, enabling sentient beings to recognize that the Two Truths of emptiness and existence are the realization of non-duality. Doing so benefits the people of that time, jointly manifesting the one true path. This is the great intention of the bodhisattva's appearance in the world.

Question: What are the general and specific meanings of the sutras? What are the general and specific meanings of the treatises? Answer: From the beginning when the Tathagata (如來，another name for Buddha) first turned the Dharma wheel in Sārnāth (鹿野苑, the place where Shakyamuni Buddha first taught), to the end when he entered parinirvana in Kushinagar (雙林, the place where Buddha passed away), although he spoke of the twelve divisions of scriptures and eighty-four thousand Dharma teachings, if we investigate their fundamental purpose, it is all to cease the false and inverted thoughts of sentient beings and to open up the one true path. This is the general meaning of all the sutras.

The so-called specific meaning of the sutras refers to the fact that the Tathagata, in order to accommodate sentient beings with both great and small capacities, revealed two expedient methods of contemplation: arising and ceasing, and non-arising and non-ceasing. If it is the condition of great and small capacities, then he speaks of the expedient methods of non-arising and non-ceasing, and arising and ceasing. If it is the condition of great and small capacities, then he reveals the expedient methods of arising and ceasing, and non-arising and non-ceasing. This is the specific meaning of the sutras. Next, the general and specific meanings of the treatises refer to the twenty-three masters who transmitted and upheld the Dharma treasury after the Buddha's parinirvana. They all did so in order to dispel wrong views and delusions, and to elucidate the correct teaching. Dispelling wrong views and delusions is to support the weakened Dharma. Elucidating the correct teaching is to repay the Buddha's kindness. Although the many treatises are different, they all serve this purpose. This is the general meaning of the treatises.

所言論別者。佛既有生滅無生滅二方便。末代之緣薄福鈍根。稟此二教並皆失旨也。聞生滅即住。不知此生滅是無生滅生滅故。雖生滅即是無生滅也。聞無生滅即住無生滅。不知無生滅是生滅無生滅故。雖無生滅即是生滅也。是以馬鳴龍樹即是四依大人。破此二緣故申佛無生滅教。即是無生滅論。申佛生滅論方便故名生滅。此是論別意也。今且置生滅之經及生滅論。正明無生滅經。以對無生滅論也。無生滅經雖復無窮。略明般若涅槃始終二教。明三種義者。一者明二因二果。二者明一因一果。三者明非因非果。所言二因二果者。大品所明。般若為因。薩婆若為果。涅槃云。佛性為因。涅槃為果。此即二因二果義也。然般若之因。猶是佛性之因故。雖二因終是一因。薩婆若果。猶是涅槃果故。雖二果終是一果。此是一因一果義也。而由因故果。果是因果。所因非果。由果故因。因是果因。所以非因。是故非因非果。施名正法。在經為正法。在論為中實。中實所發名之為觀。觀之所宜名之為論也。然正由於緣緣既非緣正生非正。所以非緣亦復非正。既非正即非觀非中則不經不論非佛非菩薩。泯然無際其道乃平故。開之彌論法界。卷之則一豪無從也。

第二重明四論大歸。就中凡有二意。明四論意同。二明四論意異也

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 所說的『論別』，指的是佛陀具有生滅和無生滅兩種方便法門。末法時代的眾生，因緣淺薄，福德不足，根器遲鈍，如果執著于這兩種教義，都會偏離佛陀的本意。聽到『生滅』就執著于『生滅』，卻不知道這種『生滅』是建立在『無生滅』基礎上的『生滅』，所以說『生滅』即是『無生滅』。聽到『無生滅』就執著于『無生滅』，卻不知道這種『無生滅』是建立在『生滅』基礎上的『無生滅』，所以說『無生滅』即是『生滅』。因此，馬鳴（Aśvaghoṣa）和龍樹（Nāgārjuna）是四依大人，爲了破除眾生對這兩種觀點的執著，闡述佛陀的『無生滅』教義，這就是『無生滅論』。闡述佛陀的『生滅論』是爲了方便教化，所以稱為『生滅』。這就是『論別』的含義。現在暫且放下關於『生滅』的經典和『生滅論』，主要闡明『無生滅經』，用來對應『無生滅論』。《無生滅經》雖然內容無窮無盡，但略微闡明《般若經》（Prajñā）和《涅槃經》（Nirvāṇa）的始終二教，說明三種意義：一是說明二因二果，二是說明一因一果，三是說明非因非果。所說的『二因二果』，是《大品般若經》所闡明的，以般若（Prajñā）為因，薩婆若（Sarvajña，一切智）為果。《涅槃經》說，以佛性（Buddha-nature）為因，涅槃（Nirvāṇa）為果。這就是『二因二果』的意義。然而，般若（Prajñā）之因，仍然是佛性（Buddha-nature）之因，所以雖然是二因，最終還是一因。薩婆若（Sarvajña，一切智）之果，仍然是涅槃（Nirvāṇa）之果，所以雖然是二果，最終還是一果。這就是『一因一果』的意義。因為有因才有果，果是因的果，但所依賴的因本身不是果；因為有果才有因，因是果的因，所以不是因。因此，『非因非果』，被稱為正法（Dharma）。在經中稱為正法（Dharma），在論中稱為中實。從中實所生髮出來的，稱為觀。適合觀的，稱為論。然而，正法（Dharma）依賴於因緣，因緣本身不是因緣，正法（Dharma）的產生也不是真正的產生，所以說非因緣也非正法（Dharma）。既然不是正法（Dharma），就不是觀，不是中實，那麼就既不是經，也不是論，不是佛，也不是菩薩。泯滅一切差別，達到無邊無際的境界，道路才能平坦。展開來說，它遍佈整個法界（Dharmadhātu）；收攏來說，它細微到無處可尋。

第二重意義是闡明四論的大歸宿。其中包含兩種含義：一是說明四論的意義相同，二是說明四論的意義不同。

【English Translation】 English version: What is meant by 'distinguishing treatises' refers to the Buddha having two expedient means: arising and ceasing, and neither arising nor ceasing. In the Dharma-ending age, beings with shallow affinities, meager blessings, and dull faculties, if they cling to either of these two teachings, will deviate from the Buddha's original intention. Hearing of 'arising and ceasing,' they cling to 'arising and ceasing,' not knowing that this 'arising and ceasing' is 'arising and ceasing' based on 'neither arising nor ceasing,' so 'arising and ceasing' is 'neither arising nor ceasing.' Hearing of 'neither arising nor ceasing,' they cling to 'neither arising nor ceasing,' not knowing that this 'neither arising nor ceasing' is 'neither arising nor ceasing' based on 'arising and ceasing,' so 'neither arising nor ceasing' is 'arising and ceasing.' Therefore, Aśvaghoṣa (馬鳴) and Nāgārjuna (龍樹) are great masters who rely on the Four Reliances. To dispel beings' attachment to these two views, they expound the Buddha's teaching of 'neither arising nor ceasing,' which is the 'Treatise on Neither Arising nor Ceasing.' Expounding the Buddha's 'Treatise on Arising and Ceasing' is for the sake of expedient teaching, so it is called 'arising and ceasing.' This is the meaning of 'distinguishing treatises.' Now, let us set aside the sutras and treatises on 'arising and ceasing' and mainly elucidate the 'Sutra on Neither Arising nor Ceasing' to correspond to the 'Treatise on Neither Arising nor Ceasing.' Although the 'Sutra on Neither Arising nor Ceasing' is infinitely vast, it briefly explains the two teachings of beginning and end in the Prajñā (般若) and Nirvāṇa (涅槃) Sutras, clarifying three meanings: first, explaining two causes and two effects; second, explaining one cause and one effect; and third, explaining neither cause nor effect. The 'two causes and two effects' are explained in the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sutra, with Prajñā (般若) as the cause and Sarvajña (薩婆若, all-knowing wisdom) as the effect. The Nirvāṇa (涅槃) Sutra says that Buddha-nature (佛性) is the cause and Nirvāṇa (涅槃) is the effect. This is the meaning of 'two causes and two effects.' However, the cause of Prajñā (般若) is still the cause of Buddha-nature (佛性), so although there are two causes, ultimately there is one cause. The effect of Sarvajña (薩婆若, all-knowing wisdom) is still the effect of Nirvāṇa (涅槃), so although there are two effects, ultimately there is one effect. This is the meaning of 'one cause and one effect.' Because there is a cause, there is an effect; the effect is the effect of the cause, but the cause on which it relies is not itself the effect. Because there is an effect, there is a cause; the cause is the cause of the effect, so it is not a cause. Therefore, 'neither cause nor effect' is called the True Dharma (Dharma). In the sutras, it is called the True Dharma (Dharma); in the treatises, it is called the Middle Reality. What arises from the Middle Reality is called contemplation. What is suitable for contemplation is called a treatise. However, the True Dharma (Dharma) depends on conditions, and conditions are not themselves conditions; the arising of the True Dharma (Dharma) is not a true arising, so it is said to be neither conditions nor the True Dharma (Dharma). Since it is not the True Dharma (Dharma), it is not contemplation, not the Middle Way, so it is neither sutra nor treatise, neither Buddha nor Bodhisattva. Effacing all distinctions, reaching a boundless realm, the path becomes level. Unfolded, it pervades the entire Dharmadhātu (法界); contracted, it is so subtle that it cannot be found.

Secondly, it clarifies the great convergence of the four treatises. Within this, there are two meanings: first, clarifying that the meanings of the four treatises are the same; second, clarifying that the meanings of the four treatises are different.

。第一明四論意同者。略有二種同。一者人同二者法同也。人同者。馬鳴龍樹提婆天親。雖復人世有殊。同是四依菩薩出世行化。是故涅槃云。四人出世。能多利益。為世四依。當知如佛也。雖同是依。而傳持法藏始末為論有二十三人也。始自摩訶迦葉終訖仰子比丘也。問馬鳴付屬何人乃至提婆付屬何人。答馬鳴去世付屬比羅比丘。比羅比丘去世付屬龍樹。龍樹去世付屬提婆。提婆去世付屬羅什。如是相承乃至付屬師子比丘也。問法勝呵梨乃至旃延達摩付屬何人。答此並是諸論議師異部相承。非傳法藏。皆為馬鳴龍樹之所破也。次言法同者。略明四種。一明四論雖複名部不同。同是摩訶衍論。無依無得為聖大宗。二者四論是佛滅后。為正教凌遲迷錯失道故。此四論同爲破迷。同申佛大教也。三者明龍樹提婆。雖是師弟子有殊。同稟如來二諦教發生二智故。慈風外扇著此共論也。四者龍樹提婆四依之人。同是佛性河中作此行化。了悟諸法不生不滅乃至無來無去故。能申佛教也。若法勝呵梨。既成斷常生滅。即屬生死十二緣河也。今之四論。申明八不破于斷常。即是欲使佛性水生緣河竭義。是故四依出世作此四論。大意同也。

次明四論雖同而異者。先就三論對釋論明異。次明就三論自明異義也。對三論明釋論異者

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：第一，闡明四論意義相同之處。大致有兩種相同：一是人相同，二是法相同。人相同是指：馬鳴（Aśvaghoṣa，佛教哲學家）、龍樹（Nāgārjuna，中觀學派創始人）、提婆（Āryadeva，龍樹弟子）、天親（Vasubandhu，瑜伽行派創始人）。雖然他們出現在人世的時間不同，但同樣是依於四依法（依法不依人，依義不依語，依智不依識，依了義經不依不了義經）的菩薩，出世行化。所以《涅槃經》說：『四人出世，能夠多多利益眾生，作為世間的四種依靠，應當知道他們如同佛陀一樣。』雖然同樣是依靠，但傳持法藏，從開始到最後著作為論的有二十三人。開始於摩訶迦葉（Mahākāśyapa，釋迦十大弟子之一），結束于仰子比丘。問：馬鳴付囑了何人？乃至提婆付囑了何人？答：馬鳴去世后付囑給比羅比丘，比羅比丘去世后付囑給龍樹，龍樹去世后付囑給提婆，提婆去世后付囑給鳩摩羅什（Kumārajīva，著名佛經翻譯家）。如此互相傳承，乃至付囑給師子比丘。問：法勝（Dharmaśreṣṭhin）、呵梨（Harivarman）乃至旃延達摩（Kātyāyanīputra）付囑了何人？答：這些都是各論議師，異部相承，並非傳持法藏。都被馬鳴、龍樹所破斥。其次說法相同之處，大致說明四種：一，說明四論雖然名稱和部類不同，但同樣是大乘論，以無依無得作為聖人的大宗旨。二，四論是佛陀滅度后，爲了正教衰微，人們迷惑錯失道路，所以這四論一同爲了破除迷惑，一同闡揚佛陀的大教義。三，說明龍樹、提婆，雖然是師徒關係，但同樣稟承如來的二諦（世俗諦和勝義諦）教義，發生二智（根本智和后得智），慈悲之風向外傳播，共同撰寫這些論著。四，龍樹、提婆是四依之人，同樣在佛性之河中作此行化，了悟諸法不生不滅，乃至無來無去，所以能夠闡揚佛教。如果法勝、呵梨，已經成為斷滅和常恒，生滅之見，就屬於生死十二因緣之河。如今的四論，闡明八不（不生不滅，不常不斷，不一不異，不來不去），破斥斷常之見，就是要使佛性之水生起，使因緣之河干涸。所以四依之人出世，撰寫這四論，大意是相同的。 其次說明四論雖然相同而有不同之處。先就三論（中觀論疏、百論疏、十二門論疏）對照釋論（十住毗婆沙論）說明不同，其次就三論自身說明不同之處。對照三論說明釋論的不同之處。

【English Translation】 English version: First, clarifying the similarities in the meaning of the Four Treatises. There are roughly two kinds of similarities: one is the similarity in people, and the other is the similarity in Dharma. The similarity in people refers to: Aśvaghoṣa (Buddhist philosopher), Nāgārjuna (founder of the Madhyamaka school), Āryadeva (Nāgārjuna's disciple), and Vasubandhu (founder of the Yogācāra school). Although they appeared in the world at different times, they are all Bodhisattvas who rely on the Four Reliances (rely on the Dharma, not on the person; rely on the meaning, not on the words; rely on wisdom, not on consciousness; rely on definitive meaning, not on provisional meaning), and they manifested in the world to practice transformation. Therefore, the Nirvana Sutra says: 'The appearance of these four people can greatly benefit sentient beings, serving as the four reliances of the world. You should know that they are like the Buddha.' Although they are all reliances, there are twenty-three people who have transmitted and upheld the Dharma treasury, writing treatises from beginning to end. It begins with Mahākāśyapa (one of the ten great disciples of Śākyamuni Buddha) and ends with the monk Yangzi. Question: To whom did Aśvaghoṣa entrust the Dharma? And to whom did Āryadeva entrust the Dharma? Answer: After Aśvaghoṣa passed away, he entrusted it to the monk Bira. After the monk Bira passed away, he entrusted it to Nāgārjuna. After Nāgārjuna passed away, he entrusted it to Āryadeva. After Āryadeva passed away, he entrusted it to Kumārajīva (famous translator of Buddhist scriptures). Thus, they transmitted it to each other, and eventually entrusted it to the monk Simha. Question: To whom did Dharmaśreṣṭhin, Harivarman, and Kātyāyanīputra entrust the Dharma? Answer: These are all teachers of different schools who transmitted it within their respective schools, and they did not transmit the Dharma treasury. They were all refuted by Aśvaghoṣa and Nāgārjuna. Secondly, regarding the similarity in Dharma, there are roughly four points: First, it is stated that although the names and categories of the Four Treatises are different, they are all Mahāyāna treatises, taking non-reliance and non-attainment as the great principle of the sages. Second, the Four Treatises were written after the Buddha's Parinirvana, because the correct teachings were declining and people were confused and lost their way. Therefore, these Four Treatises together aim to dispel confusion and together expound the Buddha's great teachings. Third, it is stated that although Nāgārjuna and Āryadeva have a teacher-disciple relationship, they both received the Two Truths (conventional truth and ultimate truth) teachings of the Tathagata, giving rise to the Two Wisdoms (fundamental wisdom and subsequent wisdom). The wind of compassion spread outward, and they jointly wrote these treatises. Fourth, Nāgārjuna and Āryadeva are people of the Four Reliances, and they both practice transformation in the river of Buddha-nature, realizing that all dharmas are neither produced nor destroyed, and even neither come nor go. Therefore, they can expound Buddhism. If Dharmaśreṣṭhin and Harivarman have already formed views of annihilation and permanence, arising and ceasing, then they belong to the river of the twelve links of dependent origination of samsara. The current Four Treatises expound the Eight No's (no birth, no death; no permanence, no cessation; no identity, no difference; no coming, no going), refuting the views of annihilation and permanence. This is to cause the water of Buddha-nature to arise and to dry up the river of dependent origination. Therefore, the people of the Four Reliances appeared in the world and wrote these Four Treatises, with the same general intention. Next, explaining the differences between the Four Treatises, although they are similar. First, the Śāstra (Daśabhūmika-vibhāṣā-śāstra) is explained in contrast to the Three Treatises (Mūlamadhyamakakārikā-vṛtti, Śataśāstra-vṛtti, Dvādaśamukhaśāstra-vṛtti) to show the differences. Secondly, the differences within the Three Treatises themselves are explained. The differences of the Śāstra are explained in contrast to the Three Treatises.

。若是三論名別通論。若是釋論名通別論也。三論名別通論者。三論通申佛一切教。通破一切迷錯。所以中論十二門論。破內人一切迷。申佛一切教。百論破外人迷。亦申佛一切教故。論二十七品橫豎破一切法。始破因緣終破邪見。二十七條生死涅槃凡聖釋惑無不洗破也。豎破者。從因緣訖邪見五句皆除故。有二破無二破。有乃至非有非無非非有非非無皆悉破也。眾病既息。佛大小假名方便二教自然得開。是故別通論也。若是釋論意。乃通申眾教。通破眾迷。而文的釋般若一部。故是通別論。就釋論中開有四句。一者破而不收。二收而不破。三者亦收亦破。四非收非破也。破而不收者。如迦旃延子及諸論義師。自恃聰明作佛法。謂非但不謂非但不謂大乘中意。亦失三藏之旨。是故論主意但破不收也。收而不破者。則是佛假名方便大小教門故。但收取而不破之。三亦收亦破者。為緣迷佛大小教。今但破迷以所秤破收取佛教。所以名收。四非收非破者。明諸法本性清凈故。實無所破亦無收也。若是三論。但破眾迷而收取佛教故。異大論也。問三論曲破不收。釋論亦收亦破。豈非取捨之必。答三論雖破實無所破。釋論雖收而無所收也。

次就三論自明異者。略開十條。一者三論立名有理教不同。二明三論有諦智不同。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：如果說是三論，那麼它的名稱是『別通論』。如果說是解釋經文的論著，那麼它的名稱是『通別論』。三論的名稱是『別通論』，意思是三論普遍地闡述佛陀的一切教義，普遍地破除一切迷惑和錯誤。所以，《中論》（Madhyamaka-karika）和《十二門論》（Dvadasanikaya-sastra）破斥內道之人的一切迷惑，闡述佛陀的一切教義。《百論》（Sata-sastra）破斥外道之人的迷惑，也闡述佛陀的一切教義。論著的二十七品橫向和縱向地破斥一切法，開始破斥因緣，最終破斥邪見。二十七條內容涵蓋生死、涅槃、凡夫、聖人，解釋疑惑，沒有不被洗滌破除的。縱向破斥是指從因緣到邪見這五句都予以破除。有二破和無二破，有乃至非有非無、非非有非非無，都全部破斥。各種病癥既然止息，佛陀的大小乘、假名、方便等二種教義自然得以顯現。所以說是『別通論』。如果是解釋經文的論著，那麼它的意思是普遍地闡述各種教義，普遍地破除各種迷惑，而文句明確地解釋《般若經》（Prajna-paramita sutra）的一部分，所以是『通別論』。就解釋經文的論著來說，可以開出四句：第一種是破而不收，第二種是收而不破，第三種是亦收亦破，第四種是非收非破。破而不收是指像迦旃延子（Katyayaniputra）以及其他論義師，自恃聰明而作佛法，認為不僅不理解大乘的深意，也失去了三藏（Tripitaka）的宗旨。所以論主的意圖只是破斥而不收納。收而不破是指佛陀的假名、方便、大小乘教門，只是收取而不破斥。亦收亦破是指因為迷惑佛陀的大小乘教義，現在只是破除迷惑，用所依據的尺度破除並收取佛教。所以稱為『收』。非收非破是指說明諸法本性清凈，實際上沒有什麼是需要破斥的，也沒有什麼是需要收取的。如果是三論，只是破除各種迷惑而收取佛教，所以與大論不同。問：三論偏重於破斥而不收取，解釋經文的論著既收取也破斥，難道不是有取有舍嗎？答：三論雖然破斥，實際上沒有什麼可破斥的；解釋經文的論著雖然收取，實際上沒有什麼可收取的。 接下來就三論自身來闡明不同之處，大致可以分為十條：第一，三論的立名在理和教義上有所不同；第二，闡明三論在真諦和智慧上有所不同。

【English Translation】 English version: If it is the Three Treatises, then its name is 'Distinctly Universal Treatise'. If it is a commentary, then its name is 'Universally Distinct Treatise'. The name of the Three Treatises is 'Distinctly Universal Treatise', meaning that the Three Treatises universally expound all the Buddha's teachings and universally refute all delusions and errors. Therefore, the Madhyamaka-karika (Treatise on the Middle Way) and the Dvadasanikaya-sastra (Twelve Gate Treatise) refute all the delusions of those within the Buddhist path and expound all the Buddha's teachings. The Sata-sastra (Hundred Treatise) refutes the delusions of those outside the Buddhist path and also expounds all the Buddha's teachings. The twenty-seven chapters of the treatise horizontally and vertically refute all dharmas, beginning with the refutation of dependent origination (Pratītyasamutpāda) and ending with the refutation of wrong views. The twenty-seven topics cover birth and death, Nirvana, ordinary beings, sages, and explain doubts, with nothing not being washed away and refuted. Vertical refutation refers to the elimination of the five phrases from dependent origination to wrong views. There is two-fold refutation and non-two-fold refutation; 'is', 'is not', 'neither is nor is not', 'neither neither is nor is not' are all refuted. Since all diseases are stopped, the Buddha's teachings of the Great and Small Vehicles, provisional names, and expedient means naturally appear. Therefore, it is called 'Distinctly Universal Treatise'. If it is a commentary, then its meaning is to universally expound various teachings and universally refute various delusions, while the sentences clearly explain a part of the Prajna-paramita sutra (Perfection of Wisdom Sutra), so it is a 'Universally Distinct Treatise'. Regarding commentaries, four phrases can be opened: the first is to refute without gathering, the second is to gather without refuting, the third is to both gather and refute, and the fourth is to neither gather nor refute. To refute without gathering refers to Katyayaniputra and other treatise masters who rely on their own intelligence to create Buddhist teachings, thinking that they not only do not understand the profound meaning of the Mahayana (Great Vehicle), but also lose the essence of the Tripitaka (Three Baskets). Therefore, the intention of the treatise master is only to refute and not to gather. To gather without refuting refers to the Buddha's provisional names, expedient means, and teachings of the Great and Small Vehicles, only gathering them without refuting them. To both gather and refute refers to being deluded about the Buddha's teachings of the Great and Small Vehicles, now only refuting the delusions, using the measure to refute and gather the Buddhist teachings. Therefore, it is called 'gathering'. To neither gather nor refute refers to explaining that the inherent nature of all dharmas is pure, and in reality, there is nothing to be refuted and nothing to be gathered. If it is the Three Treatises, it only refutes various delusions and gathers the Buddhist teachings, so it is different from the great treatises. Question: The Three Treatises focus on refuting without gathering, while the commentaries both gather and refute. Isn't this a matter of taking and discarding? Answer: Although the Three Treatises refute, in reality, there is nothing to be refuted; although the commentaries gather, in reality, there is nothing to be gathered. Next, regarding the Three Treatises themselves, to clarify the differences, roughly ten points can be opened: First, the establishment of the names of the Three Treatises differs in principle and doctrine; second, it clarifies that the Three Treatises differ in truth and wisdom.

三明三論辨諦有于教不同。四明三論辨智有長短不同。五明三論破緣有內外不同。六明三論申破有傍正不同。七明三論用假有就對不同。八明三論有對緣不對緣不同。九明三論所對之緣悟有深淺不同。第十三論師弟出世久近不同也。

第一名立不同者。小乘諸論凡有三從。一者從人立名。如舍利弗毗曇是也。二者從法受名。如成實等也。三者從譬受名。如甘露毗曇及日出論也。今此四論。受名有通別。所言通者。四論並破斷常。皆明中道實。是故四論通得稱中。又四論併爲開道令眾生反迷悟入。是故四論皆得稱秤門。四論皆有偈數。是故四論並秤曰百論。四論皆釋佛意。是故四論通名釋四論也。通而致別即有四意。若是中論從理實為名。若是十二門從言教受秤。若是百論從偈數立名也。問中論何故從理實立名。若從理實立名而秤中者。何故不從理實立宗以中為宗。答宗是二諦為申佛教。名是理實欲明二諦所表故。二諦所表不二之理。名之為中。故名理實宗。是二諦此即教理具足。所以宗名互辨也。十二門論從教立名者。明行人籍言教並得入道。此教能開通道。使行人悟入。是故從言教立名也。是故中論從理實為名。十二門從教為秤。此即教理因緣能所義也。百論所以從偈數為名者。大師舉喻云。如百健將能破怨

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 三明（指宿命明、天眼明、漏盡明）三論在辨析真諦方面，依據的教義有所不同。 四明（指宿命明、天眼明、漏盡明、慧明）三論在辨別智慧方面，各有長處和短處。 五明（指聲明、工巧明、醫方明、因明、內明）三論在破斥因緣方面，有內外之分。 六明（指聲明、工巧明、醫方明、因明、內明、世間明）三論在闡述和破斥方面，有傍敲側擊和正面論述的區別。 七明（指聲明、工巧明、醫方明、因明、內明、世間明、出世間明）三論在運用假有概念時，採取的對應方式不同。 八明（指聲明、工巧明、醫方明、因明、內明、世間明、出世間明、秘密明）三論在對待因緣時，有的針對因緣，有的不針對因緣。 九明（指聲明、工巧明、醫方明、因明、內明、世間明、出世間明、秘密明、大乘明）三論所針對的因緣，在領悟的深度上有所不同。 第十三點是論師和弟子出世的時間有早有晚。

第一點，名稱的設立不同。小乘的各種論典，大致有三種命名方式。第一種是根據人名來命名，比如《舍利弗毗曇》（Śāriputrābhidharma）就是這樣。第二種是根據法來命名，比如《成實論》（Satyasiddhi Śāstra）等。第三種是根據比喻來命名，比如《甘露毗曇》（Amrita Abhidharma）和《日出論》（Sūryodayā Śāstra）。 現在這四部論典（中論、十二門論、百論、釋論），在命名上有共通之處和區別之處。所謂共通之處，是說這四部論典都破斥斷見和常見，都闡明中道實相，因此都可以稱為『中』。而且，這四部論典都是爲了開闢道路，使眾生從迷惑中醒悟而進入真理，因此都可以稱為『秤門』。這四部論典都有偈頌的數量，因此都可以合起來稱為『百論』。這四部論典都是解釋佛陀的意旨，因此都可以統稱為『釋論』。 在共通之中又有區別，這體現在四個方面。如果是《中論》（Mūlamadhyamakakārikā），是從理體的真實性來命名的。如果是《十二門論》（Dvādaśanikāya Śāstra），是從言教來命名的。如果是《百論》（Śata Śāstra），是從偈頌的數量來命名的。 有人問：為什麼《中論》要從理體的真實性來命名？如果從理體的真實性來命名而稱為『中』，為什麼不從理體的真實性來確立宗義，以『中』作為宗義呢？ 回答說：宗義是二諦（世俗諦和勝義諦），用來闡述佛教的教義。名稱是理體的真實性，想要闡明二諦所要表達的內容。二諦所要表達的不二之理，就叫做『中』。所以名稱是理體的真實性，而宗義是二諦，這就是教義和理體的完備。因此名稱和宗義可以互相區分。 《十二門論》從言教來命名，是說明修行人憑藉言教就能進入真理。這種言教能夠開闢道路，使修行人覺悟而進入真理，因此是從言教來命名的。所以《中論》是從理體的真實性來命名，《十二門論》是從言教來命名，這就是教義、理體、因緣、能詮和所詮的意義。 《百論》之所以從偈頌的數量來命名，是因為大師（龍樹 Nāgārjuna）舉例說，就像一百個健壯的將士能夠摧毀怨敵一樣。

【English Translation】 English version The three kinds of 'Ming' (clarities: divine eye, knowledge of past lives, extinction of outflows) in the three 'Shastra' (treatises) differ in their discernment of truth based on different teachings. The four kinds of 'Ming' (clarities: divine eye, knowledge of past lives, extinction of outflows, wisdom) in the three 'Shastra' (treatises) have different strengths and weaknesses in discerning wisdom. The five kinds of 'Ming' (clarities: linguistics, crafts, medicine, logic, inner knowledge) in the three 'Shastra' (treatises) differ in their refutation of dependent origination, having internal and external aspects. The six kinds of 'Ming' (clarities: linguistics, crafts, medicine, logic, inner knowledge, worldly knowledge) in the three 'Shastra' (treatises) differ in their exposition and refutation, having indirect and direct approaches. The seven kinds of 'Ming' (clarities: linguistics, crafts, medicine, logic, inner knowledge, worldly knowledge, transcendental knowledge) in the three 'Shastra' (treatises) differ in their use of the concept of provisional existence, employing different corresponding methods. The eight kinds of 'Ming' (clarities: linguistics, crafts, medicine, logic, inner knowledge, worldly knowledge, transcendental knowledge, secret knowledge) in the three 'Shastra' (treatises) differ in their treatment of dependent origination, some addressing it directly, others not. The nine kinds of 'Ming' (clarities: linguistics, crafts, medicine, logic, inner knowledge, worldly knowledge, transcendental knowledge, secret knowledge, Mahayana knowledge) in the three 'Shastra' (treatises) differ in the depth of understanding of the dependent origination they address. The thirteenth point is that the teachers and disciples appeared in the world at different times, some earlier and some later.

Firstly, the establishment of names differs. The various 'Shastra' (treatises) of the Hinayana generally have three ways of naming. The first is to name after a person, such as the 'Śāriputrābhidharma' (Śāriputrābhidharma). The second is to name after a Dharma, such as the 'Satyasiddhi Śāstra' (Satyasiddhi Śāstra). The third is to name after a metaphor, such as the 'Amrita Abhidharma' (Amrita Abhidharma) and the 'Sūryodayā Śāstra' (Sūryodayā Śāstra). Now, these four 'Shastra' (treatises) (Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, Dvādaśanikāya Śāstra, Śata Śāstra, and the commentaries) have commonalities and differences in naming. The commonalities are that these four 'Shastra' (treatises) all refute the views of permanence and annihilation, and they all elucidate the Middle Way reality. Therefore, they can all be called 'Middle'. Moreover, these four 'Shastra' (treatises) all aim to open the path, enabling sentient beings to awaken from delusion and enter the truth. Therefore, they can all be called 'Gate of Weighing'. These four 'Shastra' (treatises) all have a number of verses, so they can all be collectively called 'Hundred 'Shastra' (treatises)'. These four 'Shastra' (treatises) all explain the Buddha's intention, so they can all be generally called 'Commentaries'. Within the commonalities, there are also differences, which are reflected in four aspects. In the case of the 'Mūlamadhyamakakārikā' (Mūlamadhyamakakārikā), the name is derived from the reality of the principle. In the case of the 'Dvādaśanikāya Śāstra' (Dvādaśanikāya Śāstra), the name is derived from the teachings. In the case of the 'Śata Śāstra' (Śata Śāstra), the name is derived from the number of verses. Someone asks: Why is the 'Mūlamadhyamakakārikā' (Mūlamadhyamakakārikā) named after the reality of the principle? If it is named after the reality of the principle and called 'Middle', why not establish the doctrine based on the reality of the principle, with 'Middle' as the doctrine? The answer is: The doctrine is the two truths (conventional truth and ultimate truth), used to expound the Buddha's teachings. The name is the reality of the principle, wanting to elucidate what the two truths express. The non-dual principle that the two truths express is called 'Middle'. Therefore, the name is the reality of the principle, while the doctrine is the two truths. This is the completeness of teaching and principle. Therefore, the name and the doctrine can be distinguished from each other. The 'Dvādaśanikāya Śāstra' (Dvādaśanikāya Śāstra) is named after the teachings, explaining that practitioners can enter the truth through the teachings. These teachings can open the path, enabling practitioners to awaken and enter the truth. Therefore, it is named after the teachings. So, the 'Mūlamadhyamakakārikā' (Mūlamadhyamakakārikā) is named after the reality of the principle, and the 'Dvādaśanikāya Śāstra' (Dvādaśanikāya Śāstra) is named after the teachings. This is the meaning of teaching, principle, condition, expression, and what is expressed. The reason why the 'Śata Śāstra' (Śata Śāstra) is named after the number of verses is because the master (Nāgārjuna) gives an example, saying that just like a hundred strong generals can destroy enemies.

敵使人民安穩國家得全故。嘆此人為百健將。提婆亦爾。以此百偈破九十六種外道怨賊。使眾生慧明得開如來正法宣流行世故。嘆此百偈有能破之功即名為百論也。問百論亦得秤中不。答凡有四句。一者兩舍而非中。二者中於而非兩舍。三者亦中亦兩舍。四者非中非兩舍。一言兩舍而非中者。即是百論。雖復罪禍兩舍。不作中名也。中而非兩舍者。此即經中所辨。一色一香並皆是中。未必皆須兩舍也。亦中亦兩舍者。即是中論。雙舍斷常故名兩舍也。亦強名中實。所以名中也。非中非兩舍者。此有二意。一者斷常顛倒故非中非兩舍。二者諸法本性清凈故非中非兩舍也。

第二明三論宗教不同者。若是中論以二諦為宗。若是百論以二智為宗。十二門論前後兩出。一云同中論以二諦為宗。又云以境智為宗也。中論以二諦為宗者。諸佛說法常依二諦。但龍樹與外人。同學佛二諦有其得失。外人學佛二諦。成斷常生滅來出一異也。龍樹了佛二諦不生不滅乃至無來無去。所以舍初章即牒八不。八不即是二諦。是故以二諦為宗。若是百論面折外道。使故九十六種理屈辭窮故。嘆此二智有閑邪顯正之功故。以二智為宗百論宗也。

第三明三論辨諦有于教不同者。通明三論辨諦。即有于諦及以教諦。通而致別。百論即明於

諦。中論即明教諦。所以然者。于諦即淺教諦即深。中論明如來假名空有教門。皆是不生不滅。若是百論。即就二緣而明於兩諦也。問于諦教諦有何異耶。答教諦就佛成諦之言。于諦即約兩緣明二實故。于凡為實也。問經云。一切世諦若於如來即是第一義諦。此何物。于諦。答此諦是因緣于諦也。同若爾。教諦便不就緣用教。何為于諦。便無言教。那得諦名。答教諦非不被緣。但緣稟此教。即便悟理故名教諦也。于諦亦稟佛教。但于恃作解。不能博悟故名于諦也。

第四明三論用智長短者。若是中論明實智方便。百論即明實智與權智故。權智即短實智長也。問何故龍樹用實方便智。百論用實與權智。答提婆面折外道。一時權巧功用故。權智即短也。中論匡正佛法。整里家國非時用。是故二智則長。例如大品凈名二經辨智有長短。大品即明實方便智故其用則長。凈名則明權實二智其用則短也。問二經長短三智與三論長短智云何。答二經明智通於破立故。如大品破有所得。而廣明因果法門。凈名破但大但小。而廣明菩薩不思議用也。若是三論。但破洗諸法不明立也。問佛法大海無量寶聚。三論何但用一破一。而言是佛法通方論耶。將舊醫用乳田父食鹽。答一切眾生未觀波若以來。並皆依著稟教成病。是故三論。廣破

依著。廣破眾生病。眾生病若消如來正教自開也。是故不須別立。

第五明三論破緣有內外不同者。若是中論與十二門即破內學。若是百論即破外學。所以然者。龍樹出時正法始滅像法始興。此中有內病興世故。大論云。佛滅后五百歲後有五百部出興於世。皆執自見為是。他見為非。不知佛意。為于解脫故聞畢竟空法。開邪覆正。是故菩薩破邪顯正。所以秤為破內學也。問龍樹破內學不但除迷教之病。通收取佛教者。提婆破外學亦有收取義不。答亦有收義。如大經文字品云。一切經書咒術皆是佛說法。非外道說。是故亦有收歸內。又大經云。輪王出世還收取諸牛。亦是其事也。問百論破外而有收外義者。中論破內亦有收內義不。答亦有此義。故大論云。諸論義師自作此說。尚不得三藏中意。況大乘此破不收也。

第六明三論申破傍正不同凡有二種。一者就破明傍正。二者就申明傍正也。就破明傍正者。中論正破內傍破外道。百論正破外迷傍破內執也。所以然者。若外執同內執者。中論傍破。若內執同外執者。百論即破也。就申明傍正者。中論正申佛教傍破外道。百論正破外道傍申佛教。所以然者。中論初發始即牒八不二諦。後方破外故。正申傍破也。若是百論初發始即歸三寶故。正破傍申也。十二門論與

中論云何。答大師有時云。兩諸義無有異。有時云。十二門申義為強破義為弱。故初發即云說曰。今當略解摩訶衍義也。若是中論初牒八不破外人。故論文云。諸法無量。何故但以此八事破。故知。中論正破傍申也。

第七明三論用假不同者。假者四種。一者因緣假。如空有二諦。二者隨緣假。如雲世者說有我我亦說世智說無我。又百論云。佛隨眾生意故下中上施戒智。三者就緣假。如眾生執有就求有無從。眾生執無就求無不得。此是就緣假也。四者對緣假。如說常為對治無常說無常為對治常也。若是經中及以大論具足四假。若是三論唯有二假。一者就緣二者對緣。若中論正因緣假強對緣假故弱故。龍樹就外人覓生滅斷常皆不可得。若百論對緣假強就緣假弱故。外道執一借異。對破外道執異借一對破也。

第八明三論有對緣不對緣不同者。若是百論。提婆菩薩。廣集九十六種外道邪師故。八方論士。皆集四衢各建其宗也。初立無方論者。提婆對面折外道。辨屈邪師也。若中論。龍樹菩薩。潛惟著筆。玄收迷情。以為折破。故不面對外人。異提婆也。問何故如此。答龍樹出世如第三佛。是故傳云。智慧日以頹斯人再輝世。昏寢以久闇此人悟令覺。又云。明即白月爭輝。智即聖人並照故。外道小乘聞名立伏。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 《中論》講了什麼？回答是，大師有時說，兩種意義沒有差別。有時說，用十二門來闡述意義是強的，用來破斥意義是弱的。所以一開始就說，現在將簡要解釋摩訶衍（Mahayana，大乘）的意義。如果是《中論》，一開始就列出八不來破斥外人。所以論文中說，諸法是無量的，為什麼只用這八件事來破斥？因此可知，《中論》主要是破斥，附帶闡述。 第七，說明三論運用假名（假，provisional）的不同。假名有四種：第一種是因緣假，比如空和有二諦（Two Truths，二諦）。第二種是隨緣假，比如《云世經》說，世俗之人說有我（Atman，我），我也隨順世俗說有我；智者說無我，我也隨順智者說無我。又如《百論》說，佛隨順眾生的意願，所以有下、中、上三種佈施、持戒和智慧。第三種是就緣假，比如眾生執著于有，就順著他們求有，最終求有而不可得；眾生執著于無，就順著他們求無，最終求無而不可得。這就是就緣假。第四種是對緣假，比如爲了對治無常而說常，爲了對治常而說無常。如果是經和論，就具足這四種假名。如果是三論，就只有兩種假名：一種是就緣，一種是對緣。如果《中論》是因緣假強，對緣假就弱。龍樹（Nagarjuna，龍樹）就著外人的觀點來尋找生滅斷常，結果都是不可得。如果《百論》是對緣假強，就緣假就弱。外道執著於一，就借用異來對破；外道執著于異，就借用一對破。 第八，說明三論有對緣和不對緣的不同。如果是《百論》，提婆（Aryadeva，提婆）菩薩廣泛收集了九十六種外道邪師的觀點，所以八方論士都聚集在十字路口，各自建立自己的宗派。最初設立無方論的人，提婆當面折服外道，辨別駁倒邪師。如果是《中論》，龍樹菩薩暗中思考，著筆立論，玄妙地收攝迷惑的情感，以此來進行折服破斥，所以不面對外人，這和提婆不同。問：為什麼會這樣？答：龍樹出世就像第三尊佛一樣。所以流傳著這樣的話：『智慧的太陽已經衰落，這個人再次照亮世界。』『昏睡已經很久，這個人覺悟使人醒來。』又說：『光明就像白月爭輝，智慧就像聖人並照。』所以外道小乘聽到他的名字就立刻降伏。

【English Translation】 English version: What does the Madhyamaka-karika (中論, Treatise on the Middle Way) discuss? The answer is that the master sometimes says that the two meanings are not different. Sometimes he says that using the twelve gates to expound the meaning is strong, while using them to refute the meaning is weak. Therefore, at the beginning, it is said that we will now briefly explain the meaning of Mahayana (摩訶衍, Great Vehicle). If it is the Madhyamaka-karika, it initially lists the eight negations to refute outsiders. Therefore, the text says that all dharmas (諸法, phenomena) are immeasurable, so why only use these eight matters to refute? Thus, it is known that the Madhyamaka-karika primarily refutes and secondarily expounds. Seventh, it explains the difference in the use of provisional names (假, kalpana) in the Three Treatises. There are four types of provisional names: the first is the provisional name of cause and condition (hetu-pratyaya-kalpana, 因緣假), such as the Two Truths (dve satyani, 二諦) of emptiness and existence. The second is the provisional name of following conditions (pratitya-samutpada-kalpana, 隨緣假), such as the Cloud World Sutra saying, 'Worldly people say there is a self (Atman, 我), and I also follow the worldly to say there is a self; wise people say there is no self, and I also follow the wise to say there is no self.' Also, as the Sata-sastra (百論, One Hundred Verses Treatise) says, the Buddha follows the wishes of sentient beings, so there are lower, middle, and upper levels of giving, precepts, and wisdom. The third is the provisional name of conforming to conditions (apeksha-kalpana, 就緣假), such as sentient beings clinging to existence, so we conform to them by seeking existence, but ultimately seeking existence is unattainable; sentient beings clinging to non-existence, so we conform to them by seeking non-existence, but ultimately seeking non-existence is unattainable. This is the provisional name of conforming to conditions. The fourth is the provisional name of opposing conditions (pratipaksha-kalpana, 對緣假), such as saying permanence to counteract impermanence, and saying impermanence to counteract permanence. If it is a sutra or treatise, it fully possesses these four types of provisional names. If it is the Three Treatises, there are only two types of provisional names: one is conforming to conditions, and the other is opposing conditions. If the Madhyamaka-karika has a strong provisional name of cause and condition, then the provisional name of opposing conditions is weak. Nagarjuna (龍樹) seeks birth, death, cessation, and permanence from the perspective of outsiders, and the result is that all are unattainable. If the Sata-sastra has a strong provisional name of opposing conditions, then the provisional name of conforming to conditions is weak. Externalists cling to one, so they borrow difference to counter it; externalists cling to difference, so they borrow one to counter it. Eighth, it explains the difference between the Three Treatises in having or not having opposing conditions. If it is the Sata-sastra, Aryadeva (提婆) Bodhisattva widely collected the views of ninety-six types of heretical teachers, so debaters from all directions gathered at the crossroads, each establishing their own sect. The person who initially established the theory of no direction, Aryadeva, directly subdued the externalists and distinguished and refuted the heretical teachers. If it is the Madhyamaka-karika, Nagarjuna Bodhisattva secretly contemplated, wrote treatises, and subtly gathered confused emotions, using this to subdue and refute, so he did not face outsiders directly, which is different from Aryadeva. Question: Why is this so? Answer: Nagarjuna's appearance in the world is like the third Buddha. Therefore, it is said that 'The sun of wisdom has declined, and this person shines on the world again.' 'Drowsiness has been long, and this person awakens people.' It is also said that 'Brightness is like the white moon competing for brilliance, and wisdom is like a sage illuminating together.' Therefore, externalists and Hinayana (小乘, Lesser Vehicle) practitioners immediately surrender upon hearing his name.

不敢論義。所以龍樹面不破也。但著論破也。提婆不爾。初但隱跡。為婆羅門故。外道諸師不畏彈之。故與此交論也。問提婆面對外道。亦有著論以不。答提婆九十日中。與外道論義。后還閑林。撰當時之言。著此百論也。

第九明三論所破之緣根有利鈍不同者。以眾生根生不同。今約中百二論。略開三論種不同。有一種根緣。百論始舍罪福終破空有。當此言下即悟無生也。第二有一種眾生。即是外道。經聞提婆當時所破之理。屈申未悟。后出家稟受佛經。方始得悟。是中根人也。第三下根人。外道聞百論所破。雖復言理俱屈。而不得悟。后稟佛經。亦不得悟。非但不悟學于佛經。更復須迷執邪。后為中論所破方得悟也。問亦有內道之人雖聞中論所破不悟。聞百論破方始悟不。答亦有此義故。中論深聞不解。百論就情玄略故。便得悟也。

第十明三論師弟不同者。睿公云。天竺有十六大國方八十里。三百五十年。有馬鳴菩薩出世。令大乘之化。重啟閻浮提。后五百三十年。有龍樹菩薩出世。扇無相之道。三啟末俗也。八百餘年。有婆羅門種名曰提婆。是龍樹上足弟子。其人皆與玄師並照德。與皆機凈行故。令佛法興隆邪道隱塞也。問中論既得秤中。百論亦得秤中不。答二論俱得秤中。問若俱得秤中更有何

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 不敢直接辯論義理，所以龍樹（Nāgārjuna，佛教中觀派創始人）避免了直接的辯論，而是通過著作來破斥。提婆（Āryadeva，龍樹弟子）則不同，起初只是隱藏身份，因為要面對的是婆羅門。外道和他們的老師們並不害怕辯論，所以提婆才與他們交鋒辯論。問：提婆面對外道時，也有著作來論述嗎？答：提婆在九十天內與外道辯論義理，之後回到閑靜的林間，整理當時的言論，寫成了這部《百論》。 第九，說明三論所破斥的對象，因根器有利鈍而不同。因為眾生的根性不同，現在根據《中論》、《百論》、《十二門論》，大致區分三種不同的根器。第一種根器，聽聞《百論》，開始捨棄罪福之見，最終破除空有之執，當即領悟無生之理。第二種眾生，即是外道，聽聞提婆當時所破斥的道理，雖然感到理屈，但未能領悟。後來出家，接受佛經的教導，才開始領悟，這是中等根器的人。第三種是下等根器的人，外道聽聞《百論》的破斥，雖然言語上理屈，但仍然不能領悟。後來學習佛經，也不能領悟，非但不能領悟佛經，反而更加迷惑執著于邪見，之後被《中論》所破斥，才能領悟。問：也有內道之人，雖然聽聞《中論》的破斥不能領悟，聽聞《百論》的破斥才開始領悟的嗎？答：也有這種情況。因為《中論》深奧，聽聞后難以理解，《百論》就事論理，玄妙而簡略，所以容易領悟。 第十，說明三論的師承不同。睿公（鳩摩羅什弟子）說：天竺有十六大國，方圓八十里。在三百五十年時，有馬鳴菩薩（Aśvaghoṣa，佛教大德）出世，使大乘教化重新開啟于閻浮提（Jambudvīpa，指我們所居住的這個世界）。五百三十年後，有龍樹菩薩出世，弘揚無相之道，第三次開啟末法時代的教化。八百多年後，有婆羅門種姓的人，名叫提婆，是龍樹最傑出的弟子。他們都與玄妙的老師並肩照耀，都具有清凈的德行，所以使佛法興隆，邪道隱沒。問：《中論》既然可以作為衡量標準，那麼《百論》也可以作為衡量標準嗎？答：《中論》和《百論》都可以作為衡量標準。問：如果都可以作為衡量標準，還有什麼...

【English Translation】 English version: I dare not argue directly about the meaning. Therefore, Nāgārjuna (founder of the Madhyamaka school of Buddhism) avoided direct debate, but refuted through treatises. Āryadeva (Nāgārjuna's disciple) was different. At first, he concealed his identity because he was facing Brahmins. The heretics and their teachers were not afraid of debate, so Āryadeva engaged in debate with them. Question: When Āryadeva faced the heretics, did he also write treatises? Answer: Āryadeva debated with the heretics for ninety days, and then returned to a quiet forest, organized his statements at that time, and wrote this Śataśāstra (Hundred Treatise). Ninth, explaining that the objects refuted by the three treatises differ due to the sharpness or dullness of the faculties. Because sentient beings have different faculties, now, based on the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (Fundamental Verses on the Middle Way), Śataśāstra, and Dvādaśanikāyaśāstra (Twelve Gate Treatise), we roughly distinguish three different types of faculties. The first type of faculty, upon hearing the Śataśāstra, initially abandons the views of merit and demerit, and ultimately refutes the attachment to emptiness and existence, immediately realizing the principle of non-origination. The second type of sentient beings, namely heretics, although feeling refuted by the principles refuted by Āryadeva at that time, failed to realize it. Later, they renounced the household life, received the teachings of the Buddhist scriptures, and then began to realize it. These are people of medium faculties. The third type is people of inferior faculties. The heretics, upon hearing the refutation of the Śataśāstra, although verbally feeling refuted, still cannot realize it. Later, they study the Buddhist scriptures, but still cannot realize it. Not only can they not realize the Buddhist scriptures, but they become even more confused and attached to wrong views. Only after being refuted by the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā can they realize it. Question: Are there also people within the Buddhist path who, although hearing the refutation of the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, cannot realize it, but begin to realize it upon hearing the refutation of the Śataśāstra? Answer: There is also this situation. Because the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā is profound and difficult to understand upon hearing it, the Śataśāstra discusses matters based on emotions, and is mysterious and concise, so it is easy to realize. Tenth, explaining the different lineages of the three treatises. Master Rui (Kumārajīva's disciple) said: There are sixteen great countries in India, each eighty li in circumference. In the year 350, the Bodhisattva Aśvaghoṣa (Buddhist master) appeared in the world, causing the Mahayana teachings to be reopened in Jambudvīpa (the world we live in). Five hundred and thirty years later, the Bodhisattva Nāgārjuna appeared in the world, propagating the path of non-form, and for the third time opening the teachings of the degenerate age. More than eight hundred years later, there was a person of the Brahmin caste named Āryadeva, who was Nāgārjuna's most outstanding disciple. They all shone alongside the mysterious teachers, and all had pure virtues, so they caused the Buddhist teachings to flourish and the heretical paths to be hidden. Question: Since the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā can be used as a standard of measurement, can the Śataśāstra also be used as a standard of measurement? Answer: Both the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā and the Śataśāstra can be used as standards of measurement. Question: If both can be used as standards of measurement, what else...

異。答若是中論即對偏辨中。若是中論即對邪辨中。所以然者。中論迷教之緣。學佛二諦不悟二不二。故成偏執。所以今破此偏二故。明不二之中也。若是百論不學佛教故。一向邪錯。破此邪錯以明中故。是破邪中也。

次第三約釋論中論宗百論明秤中觀論。今作離合兩釋也。前則離解三字。次則合釋三字也。然雖復離釋非是異義。雖複合釋非是一義。所以然者。正為學人若聞合釋即作一解。若聞離釋則作異解。為此人故。所以言雖復離釋非是異義。雖複合釋非是一義。例如人聞波若如佛性法界涅槃便作異解。若聞波若即佛性法界即是涅槃便作一解。對此人故。明波若佛性法界涅槃雖複合非一。雖復離非是異也。

所言中者。以實為義。亦以五為義也。以實為義者。開中睿師云。以中為名者。然其實也。以正為義者。肇公正觀論云。中即是正也。若以實為中義者。即名為實相實際。若以正為中義。即名正法正性也。問云何中以實為義。答正為失道之人。明學皆是虛妄。對此虛妄故名中實也。問何者是失道人。答通而為論。未見佛性。未觀波若以來。並是虛妄也。斷常中行故是失道人也。別而為言。有三種人。第一是失佛教人。言世諦是有真諦是無生死定斷佛果定常。如此人等。即是虛妄也。第二自樹之人

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 問：『異』是什麼意思？答：如果是《中論》（Mūlamadhyamakakārikā，根本中論），那就是針對偏頗來辨明中道。如果是《中論》，那就是針對邪見來辨明中道。之所以這樣說，是因為《中論》是針對迷惑于佛教教義的人，他們學習佛陀的二諦（真諦和俗諦）卻不領悟二者不二的道理，因此形成了偏頗的執著。所以現在破除這種偏頗的二元對立，是爲了闡明不二的中道。如果是《百論》（Śataśāstra，百論），則是針對那些不學習佛教教義，一味邪謬錯誤的人。破除這種邪謬錯誤是爲了闡明中道，所以是破邪顯中。 其次，第三種解釋是約《釋論》（Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa，大智度論）、《中論》、《百論》來闡明『秤』（衡量）和『中觀論』。現在分別作離合兩種解釋。前面是分開解釋這三個詞，後面是合起來解釋這三個詞。然而，雖然是分開解釋，但並非不同的含義；雖然是合起來解釋，但並非相同的含義。之所以這樣說，正是因為學習的人如果聽到合起來解釋，就只作一種理解；如果聽到分開解釋，就作不同的理解。爲了這些人，所以說雖然是分開解釋，但並非不同的含義；雖然是合起來解釋，但並非相同的含義。例如，人們聽到般若（Prajñā，智慧）、佛性（Buddhatā，如來藏）、法界（Dharmadhātu，宇宙萬有）和涅槃（Nirvāṇa，寂滅）就作不同的理解；如果聽到般若即是佛性、法界即是涅槃，就作一種理解。爲了這些人，闡明般若、佛性、法界、涅槃雖然合起來並非相同，雖然分開也並非不同。 所說的『中』，以『實』為含義，也以『五』為含義。以『實』為含義，開中睿師說：『以『中』為名，是因為它是真實。』以『正』為含義，肇公正觀論說：『中即是正。』如果以『實』為『中』的含義，就名為實相（Tathatā，真如）實際（Bhūtakoti，真如實際）。如果以『正』為『中』的含義，就名為正法（Saddharma，正法）正性（Dharmatā，法性）。問：為什麼『中』以『實』為含義？答：正是爲了那些迷失道路的人，說明他們所學的一切都是虛妄。針對這種虛妄，所以名為『中實』。問：誰是迷失道路的人？答：總的來說，未見佛性、未觀般若以來，都是虛妄。斷常（常見和斷見）中行（不落兩邊的中道修行）故是迷失道路的人。具體來說，有三種人。第一種是迷失佛教教義的人，他們說世諦（Saṃvṛti-satya，俗諦）是有，真諦（Paramārtha-satya，真諦）是無，生死（Saṃsāra，輪迴）是斷滅，佛果（Buddha-phala，成佛的果位）是常住。像這樣的人，就是虛妄的。第二種是自立門戶的人。

【English Translation】 English version: Question: What does 'difference' mean? Answer: If it refers to the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (Fundamental Verses on the Middle Way), it means using the Middle Way to distinguish against bias. If it refers to the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, it means using the Middle Way to distinguish against wrong views. The reason for this is that the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā is aimed at those who are confused about Buddhist teachings, who study the two truths (conventional truth and ultimate truth) but do not understand that the two are non-dual, thus forming biased attachments. Therefore, the purpose of refuting this biased duality is to clarify the non-dual Middle Way. If it refers to the Śataśāstra (Treatise in One Hundred Verses), it is aimed at those who do not study Buddhist teachings and are consistently wrong and mistaken. Refuting these wrong and mistaken views is to clarify the Middle Way, so it is about revealing the Middle Way by refuting wrong views. Secondly, the third explanation is to use the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa (Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom), the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, and the Śataśāstra to clarify the 'scale' (measuring) and 'Madhyamaka philosophy'. Now, let's give two explanations, one separated and one combined. The former separates the three terms, while the latter combines them. However, although the explanations are separated, they do not have different meanings; although they are combined, they do not have the same meaning. The reason for this is that if students hear a combined explanation, they will only understand it in one way; if they hear a separated explanation, they will understand it in different ways. For these people, it is said that although the explanations are separated, they do not have different meanings; although they are combined, they do not have the same meaning. For example, when people hear Prajñā (wisdom), Buddhatā (Buddha-nature), Dharmadhātu (the realm of reality), and Nirvāṇa (liberation), they understand them differently; if they hear that Prajñā is Buddhatā, and Dharmadhātu is Nirvāṇa, they understand them in one way. For these people, it is clarified that although Prajñā, Buddhatā, Dharmadhātu, and Nirvāṇa are combined, they are not the same; although they are separated, they are not different. What is meant by 'middle' is defined by 'reality', and also by 'five'. 'Reality' as the meaning, Master Ruizhi of Kaizhong said: 'The name 'middle' is because it is real.' 'Right' as the meaning, Zhao Gong's Zheng Guan Lun (Treatise on Correct Contemplation) says: 'Middle is right.' If 'reality' is the meaning of 'middle', it is called Tathatā (suchness) Bhūtakoti (the limit of reality). If 'right' is the meaning of 'middle', it is called Saddharma (the true Dharma) Dharmatā (the nature of Dharma). Question: Why is 'middle' defined by 'reality'? Answer: It is precisely to tell those who have lost their way that everything they learn is false. In response to this falsehood, it is called 'middle reality'. Question: Who are those who have lost their way? Answer: Generally speaking, everything before seeing Buddhatā and contemplating Prajñā is false. Those who practice in the middle of permanence and annihilation (avoiding the extremes of eternalism and nihilism) are those who have lost their way. Specifically, there are three types of people. The first type is those who have lost the Buddhist teachings, who say that Saṃvṛti-satya (conventional truth) exists, Paramārtha-satya (ultimate truth) does not exist, Saṃsāra (cyclic existence) is annihilation, and Buddha-phala (the fruit of Buddhahood) is permanent. People like this are false. The second type is those who establish their own schools.

。即是九十六種外道所行所學皆是也。邪錯之是虛妄也。第三即是任運顛倒不學佛教。亦不自樹邪候。直是隨逐世樂。任運失道故。如此三種人。皆虛妄也。問今辨中實正對何人。答通而為論。並對三人。別而為言。正對第一失佛教人也。問此失佛教人是何時失。答正法之末像法之始。稟佛教人。成斷常虛妄。以成斷常故失中道。是虛妄故。便失實相成邪見故。即失正法也。問何故失教人為虛妄耶。答彼云。有生有滅有有有無。是故龍樹責外云。汝若實有生滅實有有無者。就汝救之。便應可得。今就汝生滅無從實有無不得。故知。汝之所見是無而謂有。故是虛妄。是以對此虛妄偏邪故。明不斷不常不生不滅則是中道。以中實故名為正法。故凈名云。觀身實相觀佛亦然。如此觀者名為正觀。以他觀者名為邪觀。故知。中則是實實即是中也。所言中解不同。一者外道明中。二者毗曇人明中。三者成論人明中。四者中假人明中也。外道明中者。僧佉人言。泥團非瓶非非瓶即是中也。次衛世師言。聲不名大不名小為中。勤娑婆言。光非明非闇為中。三師並明中也。次毗曇人明中者。彼有事理。事中者。如國中滿大王。不在欲界復離非想。相離此二邊居在中道也。理中苦集之理不斷不常即是中道也。次成論人明中者。彼有三種中

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 這指的是九十六種外道所修行和學習的各種法門。這裡的『邪錯』指的是虛假不實的認知。第三種情況是指任由習性顛倒，既不學習佛教，也不自己創立邪說，只是隨波逐流，追逐世俗的快樂，因此迷失正道。這三種人所持的見解都是虛妄的。 問：現在所辨析的『中實』，主要針對的是哪一類人？ 答：從普遍意義上來說，是針對這三種人。但從特別意義上來說，主要是針對第一種失去佛教正見的人。 問：這種失去佛教正見的人是什麼時候開始迷失的？ 答：在正法末期，像法初期，那些接受佛教教導的人，形成了斷見和常見等虛妄的見解。因為執著于斷常二見，所以失去了中道。因為他們的見解是虛妄的，所以失去了實相，形成了邪見，因此失去了正法。 問：為什麼說失去佛教正見的人是虛妄的呢？ 答：因為他們認為『有生有滅』、『有有有無』。所以龍樹（Nagarjuna）菩薩責備外道說：『如果你們所說的生滅、有無是真實存在的，那麼就應該可以找到補救的方法。但現在，你們所說的生滅、有無，卻找不到真實存在的依據。』由此可知，你們所見到的，是本來沒有的，卻認為有，所以是虛妄的。因此，爲了破斥這種虛妄偏邪的見解，才闡明『不斷不常，不生不滅』才是中道。因為『中』是真實的，所以稱為正法。所以《維摩詰經》（Vimalakirti Sutra）說：『觀察自身實相，觀察佛也是如此。』這樣觀察才稱為正觀，其他的觀察都稱為邪觀。由此可知，『中』就是『實』，『實』就是『中』。 這裡所說的『中』，有不同的解釋：第一種是外道所說的『中』；第二種是毗曇宗（Abhidharma）所說的『中』；第三種是成論宗（Satyasiddhi School）所說的『中』；第四種是中觀宗（Madhyamaka School）所說的『中』。 外道所說的『中』：僧佉派（Samkhya）認為，泥團既不是瓶，也不是非瓶，這就是『中』。衛世師派（Vaisheshika）認為，聲音既不大，也不小，這就是『中』。耆那教（Jainism）認為，光既不是明，也不是暗，這就是『中』。這三派都是在闡明『中』的含義。 毗曇宗所說的『中』：他們有事中和理中兩種。事中，比如國王居住在國都的中央，既不在欲界，也不在非想非非想處天（Neither perception nor non-perception），遠離這兩種極端，處於中間的位置。理中，苦集（Suffering and its origin）的道理，不斷也不常，這就是中道。 成論宗所說的『中』：他們有三種『中』。

【English Translation】 English version This refers to the practices and studies of the ninety-six kinds of non-Buddhist paths. 'False and erroneous' refers to unreal and untrue cognitions. The third case refers to being habitually inverted, neither studying Buddhism nor establishing one's own heretical views, but simply following worldly pleasures and thus losing the right path. The views held by these three types of people are all false. Question: Who is the 'true middle way' being distinguished for? Answer: Generally speaking, it is for all three types of people. But specifically, it is mainly for the first type of person who has lost the correct view of Buddhism. Question: When did this person who lost the correct view of Buddhism begin to stray? Answer: At the end of the Dharma-ending Age and the beginning of the Image Age, those who received Buddhist teachings formed false views such as annihilationism and eternalism. Because they were attached to these two extreme views, they lost the Middle Way. Because their views are false, they lost the true nature of reality and formed wrong views, thus losing the right Dharma. Question: Why is it said that the person who lost the correct view of Buddhism is false? Answer: Because they believe in 'birth and death,' 'existence and non-existence.' Therefore, Nagarjuna (Nagarjuna) Bodhisattva rebuked the non-Buddhists, saying, 'If what you say about birth and death, existence and non-existence, is truly real, then there should be a way to remedy it. But now, what you say about birth and death, existence and non-existence, cannot be found to have a real basis.' From this, it can be known that what you see is something that originally does not exist, but you think it does, so it is false. Therefore, in order to refute this false and biased view, it is explained that 'neither permanent nor impermanent, neither arising nor ceasing' is the Middle Way. Because the 'middle' is real, it is called the right Dharma. Therefore, the Vimalakirti Sutra (Vimalakirti Sutra) says, 'Observe the true nature of your own body, and observe the Buddha in the same way.' Such observation is called right observation, and other observations are called wrong observations. From this, it can be known that 'middle' is 'real,' and 'real' is 'middle.' The 'middle' mentioned here has different interpretations: the first is the 'middle' spoken of by non-Buddhists; the second is the 'middle' spoken of by the Abhidharma School (Abhidharma); the third is the 'middle' spoken of by the Satyasiddhi School (Satyasiddhi School); and the fourth is the 'middle' spoken of by the Madhyamaka School (Madhyamaka School). The 'middle' spoken of by non-Buddhists: The Samkhya School (Samkhya) believes that a lump of clay is neither a bottle nor not a bottle, and this is the 'middle.' The Vaisheshika School (Vaisheshika) believes that sound is neither large nor small, and this is the 'middle.' Jainism (Jainism) believes that light is neither bright nor dark, and this is the 'middle.' These three schools are all explaining the meaning of 'middle.' The 'middle' spoken of by the Abhidharma School: They have two kinds of middle, the middle of phenomena and the middle of principle. The middle of phenomena is like a king residing in the center of the capital, neither in the desire realm nor in the realm of neither perception nor non-perception (Neither perception nor non-perception), staying away from these two extremes and being in the middle position. The middle of principle is the principle of suffering and its origin (Suffering and its origin), neither permanent nor impermanent, and this is the Middle Way. The 'middle' spoken of by the Satyasiddhi School: They have three kinds of 'middle.'

。一世諦中道即是不斷不常等也。二真諦中道即非有非無等也。三□諦中道即非真非俗也。次中假人明中者。如非有非無為中。而有而無為假。如此等解。別須廣破付在論文也。今明中略有三種。一對偏中。二因緣中。三絕待中也。所言對偏中者。學佛教人。既失其旨故。成斷常偏執。對此偏執的申故言對偏中也。次言因緣中者。如假有不得言有。不得言不有。此有即是中也。次言絕待中者。本對偏故。所以有中在。偏既去中亦不立。故非偏非中強名中也。

所言觀者。論有廣略二文。若是廣文則雲中觀論也。若是略文但言中也。關中影睿兩師。具廣略釋二義也。影師云。寂此諸道故名為中。問答折徴故秤為論也。又云。觀者直以觀達於心故名觀。論宣于口也。睿師云。以中為名照其實也。以論為秤者盡其言也。但釋中論不明觀也。今依廣本明觀義也。所言觀者觀照為義。龍樹正觀。照了諸法不斷不常不生不滅故名為觀。有二種。一生滅觀。二無生滅觀也。生滅觀者。有惑可滅。有解可生。有聖可取。有凡可舍故。生滅取捨之觀也。無生滅觀者。知惑本自不生。今何所滅。故了悟諸法不生不滅故名無生滅觀也。就此二觀各有三種。一名字觀。二義相觀。三心行觀也。名字觀者。知一切諸法但名字不內不外亦非中

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 一、在世俗諦（Satyatraya）中的中道，指的是既不是斷滅也不是恒常等。二、在真諦（Paramarthasatya）中的中道，指的是既不是有也不是無等。三、在□諦中的中道，指的是既不是真也不是俗。其次，關於中假人明中，例如，非有非無被認為是中，而有而無被認為是假。像這樣的解釋，需要廣泛地駁斥，這留待論文中討論。現在說明中道略有三種：一是對偏中，二是因緣中，三是絕待中。所謂對偏中，指的是學習佛教的人，因為失去了其宗旨，所以形成了斷常的偏執。爲了針對這種偏執而闡述的，所以說是對偏中。其次，所謂因緣中，例如假有，不能說是存在，也不能說是不存在。這種存在就是中。再次，所謂絕待中，本來是爲了對治偏執，所以才有了中道的存在。偏執既然去除，中道也不再成立。所以，非偏非中，勉強稱之為中。

所謂觀，論中有廣略兩種文字。如果是廣本，就稱為《中觀論》。如果是略本，就只稱為《中》。關中影睿兩位法師，都對廣略兩種含義進行了闡釋。影師說：『寂靜這些道，所以稱為中。問答折衷，所以稱為論。』又說：『觀，直接以觀來通達於心，所以名為觀。論，是用口宣說的。』睿師說：『以中為名，照亮其實質。以論為秤，窮盡其言語。』但睿師只解釋了中論，沒有說明觀的含義。現在依據廣本來說明觀的含義。所謂觀，觀照為義。龍樹的正觀，照見了諸法既不是斷滅也不是恒常，既不是生起也不是滅亡，所以名為觀。觀有兩種：一是生滅觀，二是無生滅觀。生滅觀，認為有迷惑可以滅除，有解脫可以生起，有聖人可以傚法，有凡夫可以捨棄，所以是生滅取捨之觀。無生滅觀，知道迷惑本來就不曾生起，現在又有什麼可以滅除的呢？因此了悟諸法不生不滅，所以名為無生滅觀。就這兩種觀，各有三種：一是名字觀，二是義相觀，三是心行觀。名字觀，知道一切諸法只是名字，不在內不在外，也不是中。

【English Translation】 English version: 1. The Middle Way in Samvriti-satya (conventional truth) is that which is neither annihilation nor permanence, etc. 2. The Middle Way in Paramartha-satya (ultimate truth) is that which is neither existence nor non-existence, etc. 3. The Middle Way in □-satya is that which is neither true nor conventional. Next, regarding the 'middle' in 'middle, provisional, person, illuminating the middle,' for example, 'neither existence nor non-existence' is considered the middle, while 'existence and non-existence' is considered provisional. Such explanations require extensive refutation, which will be discussed in the thesis. Now, there are roughly three types of the Middle Way: 1. The Middle Way in contrast to extremes; 2. The Middle Way of dependent origination; 3. The Middle Way of absolute independence. The so-called 'Middle Way in contrast to extremes' refers to the fact that those who study Buddhism, having lost its essence, develop extreme views of annihilation or permanence. It is expounded in response to these extreme views, hence it is called the 'Middle Way in contrast to extremes.' Next, the so-called 'Middle Way of dependent origination,' for example, provisional existence, cannot be said to exist, nor can it be said not to exist. This existence is the Middle Way. Again, the so-called 'Middle Way of absolute independence' originally existed to counter extreme views, hence the existence of the Middle Way. Since the extreme views are removed, the Middle Way is also not established. Therefore, it is neither extreme nor middle, and is forcibly called the Middle Way.

The term 'contemplation' (觀, Guan) has both extensive and concise texts in the treatises. If it is the extensive version, it is called the 'Madhyamaka-karika' (中觀論, Zhong Guan Lun). If it is the concise version, it is simply called 'Middle' (中, Zhong). The two masters, Ying and Rui, in Guanzhong, both explained the extensive and concise meanings. Master Ying said: 'Quieting these paths is why it is called 'Middle'. Questioning and answering, reconciling and selecting, is why it is called 'Treatise'.' He also said: 'Contemplation directly attains the mind through contemplation, hence it is called 'Contemplation'. 'Treatise' is proclaimed through the mouth.' Master Rui said: 'Taking 'Middle' as the name illuminates its essence. Taking 'Treatise' as the scale exhausts its words.' However, Master Rui only explained the Madhyamaka-karika and did not explain the meaning of 'Contemplation'. Now, based on the extensive version, the meaning of 'Contemplation' is explained. The so-called 'Contemplation' means 'to contemplate and illuminate'. Nagarjuna's (龍樹, Long Shu) Right Contemplation illuminates that all dharmas are neither annihilation nor permanence, neither arising nor ceasing, hence it is called 'Contemplation'. There are two types of contemplation: 1. Contemplation of arising and ceasing; 2. Contemplation of non-arising and non-ceasing. Contemplation of arising and ceasing believes that there are delusions that can be extinguished, there is liberation that can arise, there are sages to be emulated, and there are ordinary beings to be abandoned, hence it is the contemplation of arising, ceasing, taking, and abandoning. Contemplation of non-arising and non-ceasing knows that delusions originally did not arise, so what is there to extinguish now? Therefore, it realizes that all dharmas neither arise nor cease, hence it is called Contemplation of non-arising and non-ceasing. Regarding these two contemplations, each has three types: 1. Contemplation of names; 2. Contemplation of meanings and characteristics; 3. Contemplation of mental practice. Contemplation of names knows that all dharmas are merely names, neither inside nor outside, nor in the middle.

間不住亦非不住故。不名悟名字即是解脫故言名字觀也。義相觀者。既有其名。必應有義。如真俗是名非真非俗。是義亦得真俗。是名真以實為義。俗浮虛為義。了達此義名義相觀也。心如此行名心行觀也。

所言論者。論有二種。一者小乘二者大乘。小乘論亦有二種。一通論二別論也。大乘論亦有二種。一通二別也。小乘通論者。即是成實毗曇等二論。通釋佛三藏教意故。成論云。我欲正論三藏中實義也。小乘別論者。釋論云。有脅比丘造四阿含論也。此上無也。大乘通論者。中百等三論。通明佛大乘經意也。大乘別論者。即是釋論地論波若論別釋經故也。問論是何義。答直名論交言曰論。又云。賓主往復為論也。今依關中序云。論者欲以窮其源盡其理也。又言論者。盡其言也。他問。盡言為論者。為當用言為論為當。用無言為論若用言為論。言那得導盡言。若用無言為論者。復何秤盡言耶。答導盡言為論。那得用言為論。若無言何得盡。是故賓主。交言為欲盡言以為論也。若不交言。言何由盡也。問云。交言為欲盡言。答論主之難擬無不摧。外人無不屈。外人若不屈。即斷常不盡擬。若不摧戲論不消。戲論不息則中不生。斷常不盡觀則不發中。若不生則佛性不現。波若不顯。今斷常息。所以中生觀發。中生

觀發故佛性現波□顯。是故以盡言為論也。問但盡邪言為盡。為盡正言□盡耶。答一往為論。但盡邪言。二往為論。邪言既盡正言亦息。問論主既言那得盡言。答論主為論盡言。是故言也。如大論云。執事比丘舉手唱言眾皆寂靜。此是以聲遮聲。非求聲也。今以言盡言。非立言也。

次合釋三字者。以為二意。以中對觀。即是境智之名。以觀對中。即是智境觀。即是境智。以境是中實故生觀。便是正觀。以觀正故。所以境即是中。故中發於觀觀發於中也。所言中發觀者。由諸法不生不滅無來無去。是故能發菩薩正觀。故理乘雲。十二因緣。不生不滅非因非果故能生觀者。猶如胡𦬔能發熱病是中發於觀義也。觀發中者。以觀正故。能了達諸法皆無生滅。是觀發於中也。以觀對論為行說者。觀論即是如行而說。論觀即是如說而行。如行而說。即是說我所行。如說而行。即是行我所說。說我所行故名為中論也。行我所說故名中觀也。問此中觀論三字通別云何。答通而為論。三字皆中皆觀皆論也。所言三字皆中者。中既不生不滅。觀亦不生不滅。故即是中。中即所行不生不滅。觀即能行不生不滅。中即所照不生不滅。觀即能照不生不滅。論即是能論不生不滅。所論不生不滅。既是中能論不生不滅。亦是中也。三字皆觀者

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 觀察事物發生的原因，佛性就會顯現，波羅蜜（Paramita）的道理也會彰顯。因此，用『盡言』作為論述的方法。問：僅僅是捨棄錯誤的言論才算是『盡』，還是捨棄正確的言論也算是『盡』呢？答：從一方面來說，只是捨棄錯誤的言論。從另一方面來說，錯誤的言論既然已經捨棄，正確的言論也自然止息。問：論主既然要論述，怎麼能做到『盡言』呢？答：論主是爲了論述『盡言』，所以才用言語。就像《大智度論》（Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra）里說的那樣，執事比丘舉手唱言，讓大家安靜。這是用聲音來消除聲音，而不是爲了追求聲音。現在用言語來達到『盡言』的目的，而不是爲了建立言論。 接下來解釋『中觀論』這三個字，可以有兩種理解。以『中』（Madhyamaka）相對『觀』（Prajna），就是境（境界，Visaya）和智（智慧，Jnana）的名稱。以『觀』相對『中』，就是智、境。『觀』就是境和智。因為境是真實的中道，所以產生『觀』，這就是正觀。因為『觀』是正確的，所以境就是中道。所以說，『中』啓發了『觀』，『觀』啓發了『中』。所說的『中』啓發『觀』，是因為諸法不生不滅，無來無去，所以能啓發菩薩的正觀。所以理乘（指某種教義體系）說，十二因緣（Dvadasanga-pratityasamutpada）不生不滅，非因非果，所以能生『觀』，就像胡荽（一種香草）能引發熱病一樣，這就是『中』啓發『觀』的含義。『觀』啓發『中』，是因為『觀』是正確的，能夠了達諸法皆無生滅，這就是『觀』啓發『中』。以『觀』對『論』（Sastra）來說，就是如實修行而宣說。以『論』對『觀』來說，就是如實宣說而修行。如實修行而宣說，就是宣說我所修行的。如實宣說而修行，就是修行我所宣說的。宣說我所修行的，所以叫做《中論》（Madhyamaka-karika）。修行我所宣說的，所以叫做中觀（Madhyamaka）。問：這『中觀論』三個字，它們的共通之處和區別是什麼呢？答：從普遍意義上來說，這三個字都是『中』，都是『觀』，都是『論』。所說的三個字都是『中』，是因為『中』既不生不滅，『觀』也不生不滅，所以就是『中』。『中』就是所行持的不生不滅，『觀』就是能行持的不生不滅。『中』就是所照見的不生不滅，『觀』就是能照見的不生不滅。『論』就是能論述的不生不滅，所論述的不生不滅，既然是『中』，能論述的不生不滅，也是『中』。三個字都是『觀』。

【English Translation】 English version: Observing the cause of arising, the Buddha-nature manifests, and the meaning of Paramita (波羅蜜) becomes clear. Therefore, 'exhausting words' is used as the method of discourse. Question: Does 'exhausting' mean only abandoning wrong speech, or does it also mean abandoning right speech? Answer: From one perspective, it means only abandoning wrong speech. From another perspective, once wrong speech is abandoned, right speech naturally ceases as well. Question: Since the author of the treatise is discoursing, how can he achieve 'exhausting words'? Answer: The author of the treatise is discoursing for the sake of 'exhausting words,' and that is why he uses words. It is like in the Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra (大智度論), where the officiating Bhikkhu raises his hand and proclaims silence to the assembly. This is using sound to eliminate sound, not to seek sound. Now, using words to exhaust words is not to establish words. Next, the explanation of the three words 'Madhyamaka-sastra' (中觀論) can be understood in two ways. Taking 'Madhyamaka' (中) in relation to 'Prajna' (觀), it refers to the names of Visaya (境, object/realm) and Jnana (智, wisdom/knowledge). Taking 'Prajna' in relation to 'Madhyamaka,' it is Jnana and Visaya. 'Prajna' is both Visaya and Jnana. Because Visaya is the true Middle Way, it gives rise to 'Prajna,' which is Right View. Because 'Prajna' is correct, Visaya is the Middle Way. Therefore, 'Madhyamaka' gives rise to 'Prajna,' and 'Prajna' gives rise to 'Madhyamaka.' The saying that 'Madhyamaka' gives rise to 'Prajna' is because all dharmas are neither born nor die, neither come nor go, and therefore can give rise to the Bodhisattva's Right View. Therefore, the doctrine says that the Twelve Nidanas (Dvadasanga-pratityasamutpada, 十二因緣) are neither born nor die, neither cause nor effect, and therefore can give rise to 'Prajna,' just as coriander (胡荽, a type of herb) can cause fever. This is the meaning of 'Madhyamaka' giving rise to 'Prajna.' 'Prajna' giving rise to 'Madhyamaka' is because 'Prajna' is correct and can realize that all dharmas are without birth or death. This is 'Prajna' giving rise to 'Madhyamaka.' Taking 'Prajna' in relation to 'Sastra' (論), it is speaking according to practice. Taking 'Sastra' in relation to 'Prajna,' it is practicing according to speech. Practicing according to speech is practicing what I speak. Speaking what I practice is called the Madhyamaka-karika (中論). Practicing what I speak is called Madhyamaka (中觀). Question: What are the commonalities and differences between the three words 'Madhyamaka-sastra'? Answer: Generally speaking, all three words are 'Madhyamaka,' all are 'Prajna,' and all are 'Sastra.' The saying that all three words are 'Madhyamaka' is because 'Madhyamaka' is neither born nor die, and 'Prajna' is also neither born nor die, so it is 'Madhyamaka.' 'Madhyamaka' is the practice of non-birth and non-death, and 'Prajna' is the ability to practice non-birth and non-death. 'Madhyamaka' is the object of illumination that is neither born nor die, and 'Prajna' is the ability to illuminate that is neither born nor die. 'Sastra' is the ability to discourse that is neither born nor die, and what is discoursed is neither born nor die. Since it is 'Madhyamaka,' the ability to discourse that is neither born nor die is also 'Madhyamaka.' All three words are 'Prajna.'

。中即是義相觀。觀即是心行觀。論即是名字觀□故三字名觀也。三字皆論者。論則是能論故。能論既是所論。中觀亦是也。

第四無方問答也。

問經中二諦論中二諦。經中中道論中中道同異云何。答通而為論更無異也。論中二諦既即論中二諦也。經中二諦亦即是經中二諦也。通而致別。經中所辨。則前假后中。論中所辨。即前中后假也。所以然者。經中前明二諦教門。說此二諦為表不二。如說空有為俗有空為真。空有為俗。有不自有。有即是假。有空為真。空不自空。空即是假。故此空有既是假名。因此空有之假。表非空非有不二中。是經中前假后中。故因假得中。因教悟理也。若是論中則前中后假。將執教之緣聞有即住有。聞無即住無。此有無即成性實故。龍樹破此性實明諸法非有非無。即破性有故云非有。破性無故云非無。非有非無即是雙去。不知何以名強為中。是前明中義。因此中悟假。由非有非無中故。得生而有而無之假。是前中后假也。

問經中明中實與論中辨中實同異云何。答若是經中明二諦教實。若是論中已辨中實即理實也。

問中教實云何理實云何。答教實者。即是諸佛二諦教門成諦之言以為實。若是理實。則是明諸法不空不有實相為實也。復有于緣實義。有于凡是實

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：'中'即是義相觀，'觀'即是心行觀，'論'即是名字觀，所以這三個字可以稱為觀。三個字都可以稱為論，是因為'論'是能論述的，能論述的也就是所論述的，'中觀'也是如此。 第四部分是無方問答。 問：經中所說的二諦和論中所說的二諦，經中所說的中道和論中所說的中道，它們的相同和不同之處是什麼？答：貫通來說，沒有不同。論中所說的二諦就是論中所說的二諦，經中所說的二諦也就是經中所說的二諦。貫通而導致區別，經中所辨析的是先假后中，論中所辨析的是先中后假。之所以如此，是因為經中先闡明二諦的教義，說這二諦是爲了表明不二。例如說空有為俗諦，有空為真諦。空有為俗諦，有不是自己產生的，有就是假。有空為真諦，空不是自己空的，空就是假。所以這空有都是假名，因為這空有的假，表明非空非有不二的中道。這是經中先假后中，所以因假而得中，因教義而領悟真理。如果是論中，則是先中后假。將執著教義的因緣，聽到有就執著于有，聽到無就執著于無，這有無就成了實在的性質。龍樹破除這種實在的性質，闡明諸法非有非無，即破除性質上的有，所以說非有；破除性質上的無，所以說非無。非有非無就是雙重去除，不知道用什麼名稱來勉強稱為中。這是先闡明中義，因此從中領悟假，由於非有非無的中道，才能產生而有而無的假。 問：經中所說的中實和論中所辨析的中實，它們的相同和不同之處是什麼？答：如果是經中所說的二諦教義的真實，如果是論中已經辨析的中實，那就是理體的真實。 問：什麼是教義的真實？什麼是理體的真實？答：教義的真實，就是諸佛二諦教義中，成就真諦的言語認為是真實。如果是理體的真實，那就是闡明諸法不空不有的實相為真實。還有緣起的真實意義，還有凡是的真實。

【English Translation】 English version: 'Middle' is the contemplation of meaning, 'contemplation' is the contemplation of mind and action, and 'treatise' is the contemplation of names. Therefore, these three words can be called contemplation. All three words can be called treatise because 'treatise' is what can be discussed, and what can be discussed is also what is being discussed. The 'Madhyamaka' (Middle Way philosophy) is also like this. (Madhyamaka: the central teachings of emptiness) The fourth part is the question and answer without fixed direction. Question: What are the similarities and differences between the two truths mentioned in the sutras and the two truths mentioned in the treatises, and between the Middle Way mentioned in the sutras and the Middle Way mentioned in the treatises? Answer: Generally speaking, there is no difference. The two truths mentioned in the treatises are the two truths mentioned in the treatises, and the two truths mentioned in the sutras are the two truths mentioned in the sutras. Generalizing leads to differentiation. What is distinguished in the sutras is first provisional and then middle, and what is distinguished in the treatises is first middle and then provisional. The reason for this is that the sutras first clarify the teachings of the two truths, saying that these two truths are to show non-duality. For example, saying that emptiness and existence are the conventional truth, and existence and emptiness are the ultimate truth. Emptiness and existence are the conventional truth, existence is not self-generated, and existence is provisional. Existence and emptiness are the ultimate truth, emptiness is not self-empty, and emptiness is provisional. Therefore, this emptiness and existence are both provisional names. Because of the provisionality of this emptiness and existence, it shows the non-dual middle way of neither emptiness nor existence. This is first provisional and then middle in the sutras, so the middle is obtained through the provisional, and the truth is realized through the teachings. If it is in the treatises, it is first middle and then provisional. Taking the condition of clinging to the teachings, hearing existence, one clings to existence; hearing non-existence, one clings to non-existence. This existence and non-existence become real nature. Nagarjuna (a famous buddhist philosopher) refutes this real nature, clarifying that all dharmas (phenomena) are neither existent nor non-existent, that is, refuting existence in nature, so it is said to be non-existent; refuting non-existence in nature, so it is said to be non-existent. Non-existence and non-non-existence is a double removal, and it is not known what name to force to call the middle. This is first clarifying the meaning of the middle, and thus realizing the provisional from the middle. Because of the middle way of neither existence nor non-existence, the provisional of existence and non-existence can arise. (Nagarjuna: an important figure in Mahayana Buddhism) Question: What are the similarities and differences between the real middle mentioned in the sutras and the real middle distinguished in the treatises? Answer: If it is the reality of the two truths teachings mentioned in the sutras, if it is the real middle that has been distinguished in the treatises, then it is the reality of the principle. Question: What is the reality of the teachings? What is the reality of the principle? Answer: The reality of the teachings is that the words of the Buddhas' two truths teachings that achieve the truth are considered real. If it is the reality of the principle, then it is clarifying that the real aspect of all dharmas that are neither empty nor existent is considered real. There is also the real meaning of dependent origination, and there is also the reality of all things.

空。于聖是實。此二緣故秤兩實也。問答未盡。付入中文辨也。又成實論師云。三論師不得破成論。三論師云得破也。成論師言不得破。意以有八義故。何等是八。一者破異同。二者明二諦同。三明中道同。四明波若同。五明人同。六明異出世故。七明破小大同。八明破而有立故也。第一破異同者可辨也。第二明二諦同者。成論十號品云。不說世諦為第一義諦。說第一義諦為世諦也。又論文品云。有我為世諦。無我為第一義諦故。不得破也。三明中道同。論有無品云。方便說有。方便說無。若決定有即墮常邊。若決定無即墮斷邊。離有無二邊名為中道也。四明波若同者可解也。五明人同者。增一阿含云。是故比丘當成四諦故也。六明異出世者。龍樹七百餘年造論。呵梨跋摩亦八百餘年造論。如此有前後。前不得破后也。七明破大小故不及者。放廣道人破故也。八明破而有立者。亦可知也。彼雖如此云。而三論家皆得破也。破方可解也。至理非有非無非因非果。而涅槃以無所有為宗。大品以有所無為宗故。依涅槃經辨不有有十種。無亦然。不有十種者。一就體明不有有。二就側明不有有。三就假有明不有有。四就舉用結體明不有有。五就萬法明不有有。六對病明不有有。七豎明不有有。八就有無明不有有。九者對無名有

明不有有。十者還以諸用結明不有有也。一就體明不有有者。大經云正法寶城善有。此有是不有有也。此妄作何者。不二正法非有非無而強名善有故。此有是不有有也。二就側有明不有有者。直從體起有。此有是不有有。何者空有故言不有有。所以者側者。置無邊言有邊故也。三就假有明不者者。此假有是不有有。以假有非真有故。言不有有也。四舉用結體明不有者。此用有如體。是不有故言不有有也。五就萬法明不有者。此萬法是不有有。以其空有故。故言萬法是不有有也。六對病明不有者。撥無闡提言一切無故。此無病明不有有故。言不有有也。七豎明不有者。有非有非非有。是不有有故言不有有也。八對無名有明不有者。以對無故言此有。是不有有也。九就有無明不有者。此有無非真有無故。言不有有也。十明不有還以諸用結體故。言不有有也。又能所四句義者。一經能經所。論能論所。合為一句也二經能為論所。經所為論能。論能為經所。論所為經能。合為一句。三經能所皆是經能。論能所皆是論能。合為一句。四非能非所為無句義也。經能者即是佛能說二智。經所者即是所說經教者。論能者即是菩薩二慧也。論所者即菩薩造論也。

問何故二智與佛二慧與菩薩。即答通而為論。皆得相通。別而為言。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『明不有有』（『明』指智慧，『不有有』指非實有之有）。十種情況仍然用各種作用來總結『明不有有』的含義。 一、就本體說明『不有有』：如《大般涅槃經》所說，『正法寶城』是善妙的存在。這種『有』並非實有之『有』。這種虛妄的『有』是什麼呢？不二的正法既非有也非無，勉強稱之為『善有』，所以這種『有』並非實有之『有』。 二、就側面之『有』說明『不有有』：直接從本體生起的『有』，這種『有』並非實有之『有』。為什麼呢？因為是空性的『有』，所以說『不有有』。之所以說是側面，是因為相對於無限而言，它是有邊際的。 三、就假有說明『不有有』：這種假有並非實有之『有』，因為假有不是真有，所以說『不有有』。 四、舉作用來總結本體說明『不有有』：這種作用之『有』如同本體一樣，並非實有，所以說『不有有』。 五、就萬法說明『不有有』：這萬法並非實有之『有』，因為它們是空性的『有』，所以說萬法並非實有之『有』。 六、針對病態觀念說明『不有有』：爲了駁斥斷滅論者（闡提，icchantika）認為一切皆無的觀點，用這種非實有之『有』來闡明，所以說『不有有』。 七、豎向說明『不有有』：有非有，非非有，這種狀態並非實有之『有』，所以說『不有有』。 八、針對『無』而說明『有』，即『不有有』：因為針對『無』而說『有』，所以這種『有』並非實有之『有』。 九、就『有無』說明『不有有』：這種『有無』並非真正的『有無』，所以說『不有有』。 十、說明『不有』仍然是用各種作用來總結本體，所以說『不有有』。 另外，關於能、所四句的含義： 一、經能（佛陀能詮說的智慧）與經所（佛陀所說的經典教義），論能（菩薩的智慧）與論所（菩薩所造的論著），合為一句。 二、經能為論所用，經所為論能用，論能為經所用，論所為經能用，合為一句。 三、經能所都是經能，論能所都是論能，合為一句。 四、非能非所，是無句義。 經能，就是佛陀能說的二智（二智，two wisdoms）；經所，就是所說的經典教義；論能，就是菩薩的二慧（二慧，two wisdoms）；論所，就是菩薩造的論著。 問：為什麼二智屬於佛陀，二慧屬於菩薩？ 答：通而言之，都可以相互通用；別而言之，則有所區別。

【English Translation】 English version 'Ming Bu You You' ('Ming' refers to wisdom, 'Bu You You' refers to existence that is not truly existent). These ten aspects still use various functions to summarize the meaning of 'Ming Bu You You'. 1. Explaining 'Bu You You' based on the essence: As stated in the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, the 'Treasure City of the True Dharma' is a virtuous existence. This 'existence' is not a truly existent 'existence'. What is this illusory 'existence'? The non-dual True Dharma is neither existent nor non-existent, but is勉強 called 'virtuous existence', so this 'existence' is not a truly existent 'existence'. 2. Explaining 'Bu You You' based on the side of existence: The 'existence' that arises directly from the essence, this 'existence' is not a truly existent 'existence'. Why? Because it is an empty existence, hence the saying 'Bu You You'. The reason for calling it a side is that it has boundaries relative to the infinite. 3. Explaining 'Bu You You' based on provisional existence: This provisional existence is not a truly existent 'existence', because provisional existence is not true existence, hence the saying 'Bu You You'. 4. Explaining 'Bu You You' by using function to summarize the essence: This 'existence' of function is like the essence, it is not truly existent, hence the saying 'Bu You You'. 5. Explaining 'Bu You You' based on all dharmas: These myriad dharmas are not truly existent 'existence', because they are empty existence, hence the saying that myriad dharmas are not truly existent 'existence'. 6. Explaining 'Bu You You' in response to pathological views: In order to refute the nihilists (icchantika) who believe that everything is non-existent, this non-truly existent 'existence' is used to clarify, hence the saying 'Bu You You'. 7. Explaining 'Bu You You' vertically: Existence is not existence, non-existence is not non-existence, this state is not truly existent 'existence', hence the saying 'Bu You You'. 8. Explaining 'existence', which is 'Bu You You', in response to 'non-existence': Because 'existence' is spoken of in response to 'non-existence', this 'existence' is not truly existent 'existence'. 9. Explaining 'Bu You You' based on 'existence and non-existence': This 'existence and non-existence' is not true 'existence and non-existence', hence the saying 'Bu You You'. 10. Explaining that 'non-existence' is still using various functions to summarize the essence, hence the saying 'Bu You You'. In addition, regarding the meaning of the four sentences of subject and object: 1. The sūtra's ability (the wisdom that the Buddha can express) and the sūtra's object (the teachings of the sūtras spoken by the Buddha), the treatise's ability (the wisdom of the Bodhisattva) and the treatise's object (the treatises created by the Bodhisattva), are combined into one sentence. 2. The sūtra's ability is used as the treatise's object, the sūtra's object is used as the treatise's ability, the treatise's ability is used as the sūtra's object, the treatise's object is used as the sūtra's ability, are combined into one sentence. 3. The sūtra's ability and object are both the sūtra's ability, the treatise's ability and object are both the treatise's ability, are combined into one sentence. 4. Neither ability nor object is the meaning of no sentence. The sūtra's ability is the two wisdoms (二智, two wisdoms) that the Buddha can speak of; the sūtra's object is the teachings of the sūtras spoken of; the treatise's ability is the two wisdoms (二慧, two wisdoms) of the Bodhisattva; the treatise's object is the treatises created by the Bodhisattva. Question: Why do the two wisdoms belong to the Buddha, and the two wisdoms belong to the Bodhisattva? Answer: Generally speaking, they can all be used interchangeably; specifically speaking, there are differences.

于佛二智菩薩二慧者。依大品經云。于佛種智一切種智。于菩薩道慧道種慧也。智是決斷義。慧是解知也。異句可知也。內道有四悉檀。一者世諦悉檀。二第一義悉檀。三對治悉檀。四各各為人為人悉檀也。外道亦有四悉檀。一平等悉檀。二不平等悉檀。三依止悉檀。四自證悉檀。又之可解也。

三論家對何人明三種中道耶。山止觀法師云。正對成實論明也。山師常讀誦大品經故。依之而說也。彼經云。言說是俗諦。無言說是真諦。作中相可解也。而後師等。依中論文不生不滅等不轉依生滅明之也。用小頓悟師有六家也。一肇師。二支道林師。三真安埵師。四邪通師。五理山遠師。六道安師也。此師等云。七地以上悟無生忍也。合年天子竺道師。用大頓悟義也。小緣天子。金剛以還皆是大夢。金剛以後乃是大覺也。又用五時教師不同也。白衣劉虬云。用七時。一樹王成道為瞽聾說三歸等為世俗教也。二為說三乘別教則是三教並四時也。五大品維摩思益楞伽法鼓等是也。六者法華也。七者涅槃也。又用五時師慧觀開善等。如常聞也。而慧觀師云。從第二大品為常教。何以知之。仁王經云。超度世諦第一義諦湛然常住。又偈云。一轉妙覺常湛然也。開善云。前四時皆是無常教也。用四時者慧觀師也。大經云五味相生

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 關於佛的二智和菩薩的二慧。《大品經》中說，佛的二智是種智和一切種智，菩薩的二慧是道慧和種慧。智是決斷的意思，慧是理解知曉的意思。用不同的詞句可以理解它們之間的區別。內道有四悉檀（Siddhanta，成就）：一是世諦悉檀（Lokasamvriti-siddhanta，世俗諦成就），二是第一義悉檀（Paramartha-siddhanta，勝義諦成就），三是對治悉檀（Pratipaksa-siddhanta，對治成就），四是各各為人悉檀（Prthagjanika-siddhanta，為人成就）。外道也有四悉檀：一是平等悉檀，二是不平等悉檀，三是依止悉檀，四是自證悉檀。這些也都可以理解。

三論家（Madhyamaka，中觀學派）針對什麼人闡明三種中道（Madhyama，中道）呢？山止觀法師說，主要是針對成實論（Satyasiddhi-sastra，成實論）闡明的。山師經常讀誦《大品經》，所以依據它來解說。《大品經》中說，『言說是俗諦，無言說是真諦』。作中相可以理解為，後來的法師等，依據《中論》（Mulamadhyamakakarika，中論）中『不生不滅』等，不轉變而依據生滅來闡明中道。使用小頓悟的法師有六家：一是肇師（僧肇），二是支道林師（支遁），三是真安埵師，四是邪通師，五是理山遠師（慧遠），六是道安師。這些法師認為，七地（Saptabhumi，七地）以上的菩薩才能領悟無生忍（anutpattika-dharma-ksanti，無生法忍）。合年天子竺道師，使用大頓悟的義理。小緣天子認為，金剛（Vajra，金剛）位以前都是大夢，金剛位以後才是大覺悟。又使用五時教（Pancakala-vyavastha，五時判教）的教師也不同。白衣劉虬認為，使用七時教：一是樹王成道時為盲聾人說三歸等，是世俗教。二是為說三乘別教，則是三教並四時。五是《大品經》、《維摩經》（Vimalakirti-nirdesa-sutra，維摩詰所說經）、《思益經》（Visesacinta-brahma-pariprccha-sutra，思益梵天所問經）、《楞伽經》（Lankavatara-sutra，楞伽阿跋多羅寶經）、《法鼓經》等。六是《法華經》（Saddharma-pundarika-sutra，妙法蓮華經）。七是《涅槃經》（Nirvana-sutra，大般涅槃經）。又使用五時教的慧觀、開善等法師，如常聽聞的那樣。而慧觀法師認為，從第二時的大品經開始是常教。憑什麼知道呢？《仁王經》（Prajnaparamita-rajna-sutra，仁王護國般若波羅蜜多經）中說，『超度世諦第一義諦湛然常住』。又偈頌說，『一轉妙覺常湛然』。開善法師認為，前四時都是無常教。使用四時教的是慧觀法師。《大經》（Mahaparinirvana-sutra，大般涅槃經）中說五味相生。

【English Translation】 English version: Regarding the two wisdoms of the Buddha and the two insights of the Bodhisattva. According to the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra (Dapinjing), the two wisdoms of the Buddha are Sarvajna (種智, wisdom of all kinds) and Sarvakarajnana (一切種智, wisdom of all aspects), and the two insights of the Bodhisattva are Margajnana (道慧, wisdom of the path) and Jatijnana (種慧, wisdom of kinds). Jnana (智, wisdom) means decisiveness, and Prajna (慧, insight) means understanding and knowing. The difference between them can be understood through different phrases. The inner path has four Siddhantas (悉檀, accomplishments): first, Lokasamvriti-siddhanta (世諦悉檀, accomplishment of conventional truth); second, Paramartha-siddhanta (第一義悉檀, accomplishment of ultimate truth); third, Pratipaksa-siddhanta (對治悉檀, accomplishment of antidotes); and fourth, Prthagjanika-siddhanta (各各為人悉檀, accomplishment for each individual). The outer path also has four Siddhantas: first, the Siddhanta of equality; second, the Siddhanta of inequality; third, the Siddhanta of reliance; and fourth, the Siddhanta of self-realization. These can also be understood.

To whom do the Madhyamaka (三論家, Middle Way school) masters explain the three Madhyamas (中道, Middle Ways)? Dharma Master Zhi Guan of Mount Tiantai said that it is mainly explained to the Satyasiddhi-sastra (成實論, Tattvasiddhi Shastra) school. Master Shan often recited the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra, so he explained it based on that. The Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra says, 'Speaking is conventional truth, non-speaking is ultimate truth.' The aspect of making the middle can be understood as later Dharma masters, based on 'non-arising and non-ceasing' etc. in the Mulamadhyamakakarika (中論, Root Verses on the Middle Way), explain the Middle Way by not transforming but relying on arising and ceasing. There are six schools of masters who use small sudden enlightenment: first, Master Zhao (僧肇); second, Master Zhi Daolin (支遁); third, Master Zhen Antuo; fourth, Master Xie Tong; fifth, Master Huiyuan (慧遠) of Mount Lushan; and sixth, Master Dao'an. These masters believe that Bodhisattvas above the seventh Bhumi (七地, level) can realize anutpattika-dharma-ksanti (無生忍, the patience with the unarisen dharma). Heavenly Prince He Nian, Master Zhu Dao Sheng, used the meaning of great sudden enlightenment. Heavenly Prince Xiao Yuan believed that everything before the Vajra (金剛, diamond) position is a great dream, and only after the Vajra position is there great enlightenment. Also, the teachers who use the five periods of teaching are different. Layman Liu Qiu believed that he used seven periods of teaching: first, when the Buddha attained enlightenment under the Bodhi tree and spoke the Three Refuges to the deaf and blind, it was a conventional teaching. Second, speaking the separate teachings of the Three Vehicles is the Three Teachings and Four Periods. Fifth, the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra, Vimalakirti-nirdesa-sutra (維摩經, Vimalakirti Sutra), Visesacinta-brahma-pariprccha-sutra (思益經, Sutra of Brahma's Net), Lankavatara-sutra (楞伽經, Lankavatara Sutra), Fagujing (法鼓經, Dharma Drum Sutra), etc. Sixth, the Saddharma-pundarika-sutra (法華經, Lotus Sutra). Seventh, the Nirvana-sutra (涅槃經, Nirvana Sutra). Also, Dharma Masters Huiguan, Kaishen, etc., who use the five periods of teaching, are as commonly heard. And Dharma Master Huiguan believed that the constant teaching starts from the second period of the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra. How do we know this? The Prajnaparamita-rajna-sutra (仁王經, Benevolent Kings Sutra) says, 'Transcending the conventional truth and the ultimate truth, it is serenely and constantly abiding.' Also, the verse says, 'One turning of the wonderful enlightenment is always serenely abiding.' Dharma Master Kaishen believed that the first four periods are all impermanent teachings. It is Dharma Master Huiguan who uses the four periods of teaching. The Mahaparinirvana-sutra (大經, Nirvana Sutra) says that the five flavors arise from each other.

解師不同也。劉虬云。從佛出十二部經者。即是世諦。及三乘別教從十二部出修多羅者。大品經也。從修多羅出方等經者。即維摩思益等經也。從方等經出波若波羅蜜者。即法華經也。從波若波羅蜜出大涅槃等經也。即第五常住教也。開善慧觀師說。如常聞也。今三論家云。佛出十二部經者世諦俗半教也。從十二部經出修多羅者初半教也。從修多羅出方等者維摩思益等也。從方等出波若波羅蜜者大品般若經也。從波若波羅蜜出大般涅槃者即是涅槃也。所以然者。波若為因涅槃為果故也。若爾波若能生一切法。應是法本也。何故初教為法本耶。答理應波若是法本。所以初教為法本者。此家不須五時次第。但以滿半故也。以半為因開滿教故也。問何故成論師等。從方等出波若波羅蜜者。為第四法華教不常經名耶。答見多寶塔品云。善哉釋迦牟尼佛。能以平等大會教菩薩法也。平等慧者即是般若也。又涅槃為本有三種。一者雙卷泥洹即支謙法師翻。云胡音般泥洹。二者釋道安法師抄作雙卷。云胡本般泥洹。三者佛陀拔提作雙卷。云方等泥洹。智炎法師作十卷泥洹。又法顯法師自天竺將六卷泥洹。初雙卷后六卷也。此二部多行世也。雙卷者但說涅槃第一第二卷也。六卷者唯說第一至第一卷也。涅槃四十卷者。智炎法師于武威郡

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 對於『解師』（對佛經的解釋者）的觀點並不相同。劉虬認為，從佛陀口中說出的十二部經（佛教經典的不同分類）是世俗諦（相對真理），以及三乘（聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘）的別教（為特定根器的人所設的教法），從十二部經中產生出修多羅（佛經）的是《大品經》。從修多羅產生出方等經（廣大的、平等的經典）的是《維摩經》、《思益經》等。從方等經產生出般若波羅蜜（通過智慧到達彼岸）的是《法華經》。從般若波羅蜜產生出《大涅槃經》等，這是第五個常住教（永恒不變的教法）。開善慧觀師的說法，如常聽聞的一樣。 現在三論家（研究中觀學說的學者）認為，佛陀說出的十二部經是世俗諦的半教（不完整的教法）。從十二部經產生出修多羅的是最初的半教。從修多羅產生出方等的是《維摩經》、《思益經》等。從方等產生出般若波羅蜜的是《大品般若經》。從般若波羅蜜產生出《大般涅槃經》，那就是《涅槃經》。之所以這樣說，是因為般若是因，涅槃是果。如果這樣說，般若能生一切法，應該是一切法的根本。為什麼最初的教法是法的根本呢？回答是，道理上應該般若是法的根本。之所以最初的教法是法的根本，是因為這家（三論家）不需要五時次第（佛陀說法的五個階段），只是用滿教（圓滿的教法）和半教來區分。以半教為因，開啟滿教。 問：為什麼成論師（研究成實論的學者）等，認為從方等產生出般若波羅蜜的是第四個《法華經》教，而不是常經（永恒的經典）呢？答：因為在《見寶塔品》中說：『善哉，釋迦牟尼佛（佛教的創始人），能以平等大會教菩薩法。』平等慧就是般若。而且，《涅槃經》的原本有三種。一種是雙卷的《泥洹經》，是支謙法師翻譯的，音譯為『般泥洹』。第二種是釋道安法師抄寫的雙卷，也音譯為『般泥洹』。第三種是佛陀跋陀羅（Buddhabhadra）翻譯的雙卷，稱為『方等泥洹』。智炎法師翻譯的是十卷的《泥洹經》。還有法顯法師從天竺（印度）帶回六卷的《泥洹經》，最初是雙卷，後來是六卷。這兩部經在世上流傳較廣。雙卷的只說了《涅槃經》的第一、第二卷。六卷的只說了第一到第六卷。《涅槃經》四十卷，是智炎法師在武威郡（地名）翻譯的。

【English Translation】 English version The interpretations of the 『Discipline Masters』 (interpreters of Buddhist scriptures) also differ. Liu Qiu said that the twelve divisions of scriptures (different classifications of Buddhist scriptures) spoken by the Buddha are the mundane truth (relative truth), and the separate teachings (teachings designed for people with specific capacities) of the Three Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna, Bodhisattvayāna). The Sutras (Buddhist scriptures) that emerge from the twelve divisions of scriptures are the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra. The Vaipulya Sutras (vast, equal scriptures) that emerge from the Sutras are the Vimalakīrti Sūtra, Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda Sūtra, etc. The Prajñāpāramitā (perfection of wisdom) that emerges from the Vaipulya Sutras is the Lotus Sūtra. The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, etc., that emerge from the Prajñāpāramitā are the fifth permanent teaching (eternal and unchanging teaching). The explanation of Master Kaisan Huiguan is as commonly heard. Now, the scholars of the Three Treatise School (scholars who study Madhyamaka philosophy) believe that the twelve divisions of scriptures spoken by the Buddha are half of the mundane truth (incomplete teaching). The Sutras that emerge from the twelve divisions of scriptures are the initial half teaching. The Vaipulya Sutras that emerge from the Sutras are the Vimalakīrti Sūtra, Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda Sūtra, etc. The Prajñāpāramitā that emerges from the Vaipulya Sutras is the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra. The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra that emerges from the Prajñāpāramitā is the Nirvāṇa Sūtra. The reason for this is that Prajñā (wisdom) is the cause, and Nirvāṇa (liberation) is the effect. If this is the case, Prajñā can generate all dharmas (phenomena), and should be the root of all dharmas. Why is the initial teaching the root of the dharma? The answer is that, in principle, Prajñā should be the root of the dharma. The reason why the initial teaching is the root of the dharma is that this school (the Three Treatise School) does not need the five periods of teaching (five stages of the Buddha's teachings), but only uses the full teaching (complete teaching) and the half teaching to distinguish them. The half teaching is the cause for opening the full teaching. Question: Why do the scholars of the Satyasiddhi School (scholars who study the Tattvasiddhi Śāstra), etc., consider the Prajñāpāramitā that emerges from the Vaipulya Sutras to be the fourth Lotus Sūtra teaching, and not a permanent scripture (eternal scripture)? Answer: Because in the 『Apparition of a Stupa』 chapter, it says: 『Excellent, Śākyamuni Buddha (the founder of Buddhism), is able to teach the Bodhisattva Dharma (the path of enlightenment) with an equal assembly.』 Equal wisdom is Prajñā. Moreover, there are three original versions of the Nirvāṇa Sūtra. One is the two-fascicle Nirvāṇa Sūtra, translated by Zhi Qian, transliterated as 『Ban Ni Huan』. The second is the two-fascicle copied by Master Shi Daoan, also transliterated as 『Ban Ni Huan』. The third is the two-fascicle translated by Buddhabhadra, called 『Vaipulya Nirvāṇa』. Master Zhiyan translated the ten-fascicle Nirvāṇa Sūtra. Also, Dharma Master Faxian brought back six fascicles of the Nirvāṇa Sūtra from India, initially two fascicles, and later six fascicles. These two versions are more widely circulated in the world. The two-fascicle version only speaks of the first and second fascicles of the Nirvāṇa Sūtra. The six-fascicle version only speaks of the first to sixth fascicles. The forty-fascicle Nirvāṇa Sūtra was translated by Master Zhiyan in Wuwei County (place name).

孤臧縣翻也。又曇無讖法師。自中天竺將來諸巨牟你國翻為四十卷。后東安寺慧嚴師道場寺慧觀師。謝令郡作三十六卷。其來所以如傳云也。又竺道生師。涅槃未至漢地時。看六卷泥洹一闡提成佛。爾時國中諸大德云。泥洹無言闡提成佛故。而生師獨言闡提成佛。是故諸大德。擯生師虎山五百里也。晉末初宋元嘉七年涅槃至陽州。爾時里山慧觀師。令喚生法師講此經也。又涅槃或云二萬五千偈。或云三萬五千偈。外國以三十二字為一偈。而大品有二萬千偈。以此而當涅槃有三萬五千偈也。

略三論游意義(終)

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 這是在孤臧縣翻譯的。另外，曇無讖（Dharmaksema）法師從中古印度帶來了各地的《巨牟尼經》（Buddha's teachings）翻譯成四十卷。後來，東安寺的慧嚴（Huiyan）法師、道場寺的慧觀（Huiguan）法師，在謝令郡製作了三十六卷。其來歷的原因如傳記所說。另外，竺道生（Zhu Daosheng）法師在《涅槃經》（Nirvana Sutra）未傳到漢地時，看到六卷《泥洹經》（Nirvana Sutra），認為一闡提（Icchantika，斷絕善根的人）可以成佛。當時國內的各位大德說，《泥洹經》沒有說一闡提可以成佛，所以各位大德將竺道生法師驅逐到虎山五百里之外。晉朝末年，宋朝元嘉七年，《涅槃經》傳到陽州。當時里山的慧觀法師，讓人請竺道生法師講解這部經。另外，《涅槃經》有的說是二萬五千偈，有的說是三萬五千偈。外國以三十二字為一偈，而《大品般若經》（Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra）有二萬一千偈。以此推算，《涅槃經》有三萬五千偈。

《略三論游意義》結束

【English Translation】 English version: This was translated in Guzang County. Furthermore, Dharma Master Dharmaksema brought various 'Ju Mouni Sutras' (Buddha's teachings) from Central India and translated them into forty volumes. Later, Dharma Master Huiyan of Dong'an Temple and Dharma Master Huiguan of Daochang Temple produced thirty-six volumes in Xie Ling Prefecture. The reason for its origin is as stated in the biography. Additionally, when the 'Nirvana Sutra' (Nirvana Sutra) had not yet reached Han territory, Dharma Master Zhu Daosheng saw six volumes of the 'Nirvana Sutra' (Nirvana Sutra) and believed that an Icchantika (Icchantika, a person who has severed their roots of goodness) could attain Buddhahood. At that time, the great virtuous ones in the country said that the 'Nirvana Sutra' did not say that an Icchantika could attain Buddhahood, so the great virtuous ones banished Dharma Master Zhu Daosheng to Tiger Mountain, five hundred li away. At the end of the Jin Dynasty, in the seventh year of the Yuanjia era of the Song Dynasty, the 'Nirvana Sutra' reached Yang Prefecture. At that time, Dharma Master Huiguan of Lishan asked people to invite Dharma Master Zhu Daosheng to explain this sutra. Furthermore, some say that the 'Nirvana Sutra' has twenty-five thousand gathas, and some say it has thirty-five thousand gathas. In foreign countries, thirty-two characters are considered one gatha, while the 'Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra' (Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra) has twenty-one thousand gathas. Based on this, it can be estimated that the 'Nirvana Sutra' has thirty-five thousand gathas.

End of 'Brief Commentary on the Meaning of the Three Treatises'