T45n1860_肇論新疏
大正藏第 45 冊 No. 1860 肇論新疏
No. 1860 [cf. No. 1858]
肇論新疏捲上
五臺大萬聖祐國寺開山住持釋源大白馬寺宗主贈邽國公海印開法大師長講沙門文才述
始自好誦斯論。亦粗玩其辭。尚未能吮其理味以其心也。及隸樊川之興教。得云庵達禪師疏又數年應寧夏命。復獲唐光瑤禪師。並有宋凈源法師二家註記。反覆參訂醇疵紛錯。似有未盡乎論旨之妙伙矣。且論之淵粹簡蘊。見稱所自來。其辭文其施辯。非深入實相踞樂說善巧之峰者。莫之為之。予固以為開方等之巨鑰。游性海之洪舟。運權不之均車。排異見之正說。真一乘師子吼之雅作。欲乎吾人之性學者。先著鞭於此。此而通。則大方之理弗虞而妙獲者矣。嗟呼姚秦迄唐二百餘載。歷賢首清涼圭山賢聖之僧。皆援之以斷大義。獨不為發揮其曲要以召方來。致令諸說鑿柄紛綸。莫知所以裁之之正。乃因暇日謹摭諸先覺之說。別為訓解以授座下愧夫迫於緣冗。每釋義引據。弗獲課虛細以討求。冀同衣同德之士。恕以荒斐失而正之可也。
肇論 肇即作者之名。論乃所作之法。人法合目。為一部之都名也。以四論前後異出。又各宗一義。欲合為一。不可遍目。乃復作宗本一章。冠
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 大正藏第 45 冊 No. 1860 《肇論新疏》 No. 1860 [cf. No. 1858] 《肇論新疏》捲上 五臺大萬聖祐國寺開山住持釋源、大白馬寺宗主、贈邽國公海印開法大師、長講沙門文才 述 起初我喜歡誦讀這部《肇論》，也粗略地瀏覽過它的文辭，但還不能領會其中的義理和味道，並將其融入心中。後來到了樊川的興教寺，得到了云庵達禪師的疏解。又過了幾年，應寧夏的邀請，又得到了唐光瑤禪師，以及宋朝凈源法師的兩家註記。反覆參考訂正，發現其中有許多錯誤和不足，似乎還沒有完全領會《肇論》的精妙之處。而且，《肇論》的淵博精粹和簡潔蘊含，自古以來就備受稱讚。它的文辭和辯論，如果不是深入實相、佔據樂說善巧之峰的人，是無法做到的。我一直認為它是開啟方等（指大乘經典）的巨大鑰匙，是遊歷性海的巨大船隻，是運用權巧方便的均衡車輛，是排斥異端邪說的正論。真是大乘師子吼的雅正之作。想要研究我們本性的人，應該先在此下功夫。如果能通達此論，那麼大乘的道理就能毫不費力地巧妙獲得。唉，從姚秦到唐朝，二百多年來，歷經賢首（法藏）、清涼（澄觀）、圭山（宗密）等賢聖僧人，都引用它來判斷重大義理，唯獨沒有人發揮它的精微要義來招引四方學者，導致各種說法紛繁複雜，不知道用什麼來裁決才是正確的。於是，我便利用空閑時間，謹慎地收集各位先覺的說法，另外進行訓釋講解，以傳授給座下的弟子。慚愧的是，由於事務繁忙，每次解釋義理、引用典據，都無法仔細地考證探求。希望各位同道中人，能夠寬恕我的粗疏淺陋，並加以糾正。 《肇論》：肇，是作者的名字。論，是所作的法。人法合稱，是一部書的總名。因為四論前後出現的時間不同，又各自宗奉一個義理，想要合為一體，又不能全部列舉，於是又作了《宗本》一章，放在最前面。
【English Translation】 English version T45 No. 1860 A New Commentary on the Zhao Lun No. 1860 [cf. No. 1858] A New Commentary on the Zhao Lun, Volume 1 By Shiyuan, the Abbot and Founder of Great Wansheng Youguo Temple on Mount Wutai, the Master of the White Horse Temple, posthumously granted the title of Duke of Gui, the Dharma-Opening Master Haiyin, and the long-lecturing Shramana Wencai. Initially, I enjoyed reciting this 'Zhao Lun', and I also roughly browsed its words, but I was not yet able to comprehend its principles and savor its meaning, incorporating it into my heart. Later, when I arrived at Xingjiao Temple in Fanchuan, I obtained the commentary by Chan Master Yun'an Da. After several years, in response to the invitation from Ningxia, I also obtained Chan Master Tang Guangyao, as well as the annotations of two masters, Master Jingyuan of the Song Dynasty. After repeated reference and correction, I found that there were many errors and deficiencies, and it seemed that I had not fully grasped the subtlety of the 'Zhao Lun'. Moreover, the erudition, essence, simplicity, and implication of the 'Zhao Lun' have been praised since ancient times. Its words and arguments, if not from someone who has deeply entered the reality of phenomena and occupies the peak of skillful eloquence, cannot be achieved. I have always believed that it is a huge key to open the 'Fangdeng' (referring to Mahayana scriptures), a huge ship to travel the sea of nature, a balanced vehicle to use skillful means, and a correct argument to reject heterodox views. It is truly an elegant work of the lion's roar of the Mahayana. Those who want to study our nature should first put effort into this. If one can understand this treatise, then the principles of Mahayana can be skillfully obtained without effort. Alas, from the Yao Qin to the Tang Dynasty, for more than two hundred years, through virtuous and sagely monks such as Xianshou (Fazang), Qingliang (Chengguan), and Guishan (Zongmi), all have cited it to judge major doctrines, but no one has developed its subtle essence to attract scholars from all directions, leading to various complex and confusing arguments, not knowing what to use to judge what is correct. Therefore, I took advantage of my free time to carefully collect the sayings of the enlightened ones and made separate explanations and lectures to teach the disciples under my seat. I am ashamed that due to the pressure of affairs, every time I explain the meaning and cite the scriptures, I cannot carefully examine and explore them. I hope that fellow practitioners with the same aspirations can forgive my crudeness and shallowness and correct them. 'Zhao Lun': Zhao is the name of the author. Lun is the Dharma that was created. The combination of the person and the Dharma is the general name of the book. Because the four treatises appeared at different times and each adheres to a single doctrine, and if one wants to combine them into one, but cannot list them all, then the chapter 'Origin of the Doctrine' was created and placed at the beginning.
于論首。但云肇論宗釋皆屬。而言論者謂假立賓主。決判甚深。往復推徴。示物修悟。故名為論。然有二種。一者宗論。宗經立義。如起信唯識等。二者釋論。但隨經解釋。如智論等。今此四論是初非后。
後秦長安釋僧肇作 通鑑說。符健據關中國號大秦。至符堅末年。姚萇篡立亦號為秦。故史家乃以前後字別之。論主在後秦也。長安即今安西。釋謂釋迦。即僧之通姓。以如來姓釋迦氏故也。安公創式。遠葉阿含。千古遵依。迄今未替。僧肇即論主之諱。本傳略云。京兆人。歷觀經史備盡墳籍。志好玄微。每以莊老為心要。故嘆曰。美則美矣。然其棲神冥累之方猶未盡善後。見舊維摩經歡喜頂受。乃言始知所歸矣。因此出家學善方等。兼通三藏。聞羅什在姑臧。自遠從之。什嗟賞無極。及什來長安。肇亦隨入。姚興敕令入逍遙園詳定經論。所著四論並注維摩經。及制諸經論序。並傳於世。作猶制也造也。義誠佛說論自已為。蓋作其辭而弗蘊其義也。
宗本義 四論所崇曰宗。本謂根本通法及義。法有通別。通者。即實相之一心。中吳凈源法師云。然茲四論宗其一心。然四論雖殊。亦各述此一心之義也。別者。即四論所宗各殊。所以爾者。非一心無以攝四法。非四法無以示一心。即一是四即四是一。義謂
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 關於『論』的開端。但僧肇的論著，其宗旨和解釋都屬於『論』。所謂『論』，是指假設立賓主，決斷甚深道理，通過往復推演和辯證，來啟示人們修行和領悟。因此稱為『論』。然而『論』有兩種：一是宗論，依據經典來確立義理，如《起信論》、《唯識論》等；二是釋論，只是跟隨經典進行解釋，如《智度論》等。現在這四論屬於前者，而非後者。
後秦長安的釋僧肇（釋迦僧肇）所作，通鑑記載：符健佔據關中，國號大秦。到符堅末年，姚萇篡位建立政權，也號稱秦。所以史家才用『前』、『后』字來區分。論主（僧肇）在後秦時期。長安就是現在的西安。『釋』是指釋迦，是僧人的通用姓氏，因為如來（佛）姓釋迦氏。安世高創立的模式，深遠地符合阿含經的教義，千百年來人們都遵從依循，直到現在也沒有改變。僧肇就是論主的法名。他的本傳中略有記載：他是京兆人，廣泛閱讀經史，精通各種典籍。志向愛好玄妙的道理，常常以莊子和老子的思想為核心。所以感嘆說：『（莊老之學）美好是美好，然而他們安頓精神、擺脫累贅的方法，還不夠完善。』後來見到鳩摩羅什翻譯的《維摩詰經》，歡喜地接受，於是說：『才知道我應該歸宿的地方了。』因此出家，學習精通方等經典，兼通三藏。聽說鳩摩羅什在姑臧，就從遙遠的地方去跟隨他。鳩摩羅什非常讚賞他。等到鳩摩羅什來到長安，僧肇也跟隨進入。姚興敕令他進入逍遙園，詳細審定經論。所著的四論，以及註釋《維摩詰經》，和撰寫的各種經論序文，都流傳於世。『作』，就是『制』，也就是『造』的意思。義理確實是佛說的，但論是從自己的角度來闡述的。大概是創作了文辭，但並沒有包含佛說的全部義理。
宗本的含義：四論所崇尚的叫做『宗』。『本』是指根本、通法以及義理。法有通法和別法。通法，就是實相的一心。中吳凈源法師說：『這四論宗奉的是一心。』雖然四論各有不同，但也各自闡述了一心之義。別法，就是四論所宗奉的各有不同。之所以這樣，是因為沒有一心就無法統攝四法，沒有四法就無法顯示一心。也就是一即是四，四即是一。『義』是指...
【English Translation】 English version On the beginning of 'Treatise' (論). It is said that the purpose and explanation of Sengzhao's treatises all belong to 'Treatise'. The so-called 'Treatise' refers to the hypothetical establishment of guest and host, the determination of profound principles, and the enlightenment of people's practice and understanding through repeated deduction and dialectic. Therefore, it is called 'Treatise'. However, there are two types of 'Treatise': one is the 'Doctrinal Treatise' (宗論), which establishes doctrines based on scriptures, such as the 'Awakening of Faith' (起信論) and 'Consciousness-only' (唯識論); the other is the 'Explanatory Treatise' (釋論), which simply follows the scriptures for explanation, such as the 'Great Perfection of Wisdom Treatise' (智度論). Now these four treatises belong to the former, not the latter.
Written by Shi Sengzhao (釋僧肇) of Chang'an (長安) in the Later Qin (後秦) Dynasty. The 'Comprehensive Mirror' (通鑑) records: Fu Jian (符健) occupied Guanzhong (關中) and established the state of Great Qin (大秦). At the end of Fu Jian's reign, Yao Chang (姚萇) usurped the throne and also claimed the title of Qin. Therefore, historians use the words 'Former' and 'Later' to distinguish them. The author of the treatises (Sengzhao) lived during the Later Qin Dynasty. Chang'an is now Xi'an (西安). 'Shi' (釋) refers to Shakya (釋迦), which is a common surname for monks, because the Tathagata (如來, Buddha) was surnamed Shakya. An Shigao's (安世高) model deeply conforms to the teachings of the Agamas (阿含經), and people have followed it for thousands of years, and it has not changed until now. Sengzhao is the dharma name of the author of the treatises. His biography briefly records: He was a native of Jingzhao (京兆), widely read in classics and history, and proficient in various books. He aspired to mysterious principles and often took the thoughts of Zhuangzi (莊子) and Laozi (老子) as his core. Therefore, he sighed and said: '(The learning of Zhuangzi and Laozi) is beautiful, but their methods of settling the spirit and getting rid of burdens are not perfect enough.' Later, he saw the 'Vimalakirti Sutra' (維摩詰經) translated by Kumarajiva (鳩摩羅什) and joyfully accepted it, and then said: 'Now I know where I should belong.' Therefore, he became a monk, learned and mastered the Vaipulya Sutras (方等經典), and was proficient in the Tripitaka (三藏). Hearing that Kumarajiva was in Guzang (姑臧), he followed him from afar. Kumarajiva greatly appreciated him. When Kumarajiva came to Chang'an, Sengzhao also followed him. Yao Xing (姚興) ordered him to enter Xiaoyao Garden (逍遙園) to carefully examine the scriptures and treatises. The four treatises he wrote, as well as the annotations to the 'Vimalakirti Sutra', and the prefaces to various scriptures and treatises, have been passed down to the world. 'Zuo' (作) means 'zhi' (制), which means 'zao' (造). The principles are indeed said by the Buddha, but the treatises are elaborated from one's own perspective. It probably created the words, but did not contain all the principles said by the Buddha.
The meaning of 'Principle and Basis' (宗本): What the four treatises admire is called 'Principle' (宗). 'Basis' (本) refers to the fundamental, universal dharma, and principles. Dharma has universal dharma and specific dharma. Universal dharma is the one mind of reality. Master Jingyuan (凈源) of Zhongwu (中吳) said: 'These four treatises uphold the one mind.' Although the four treatises are different, they each elaborate on the meaning of the one mind. Specific dharma is that the four treatises uphold different things. The reason for this is that without the one mind, the four dharmas cannot be unified, and without the four dharmas, the one mind cannot be shown. That is, one is four, and four is one. 'Meaning' (義) refers to...
義理依前法體以顯義相。法通義通法別義別。此中四段之義如其分齊。是下四論之所宗。據此非宗本無以統四論。非四論無以開宗本。以法為本所宗。即本以義為本本亦即義。若法義兩分本屬法時本之義也。
本無實相法性性空緣會 此五名諸經通有。義雖差殊不越理事。今始終相躡略而釋之。初謂緣會之事緣前元無。故云本無。無相之相復雲實相。即此實相是諸法性。故云法性。此性真空故復云性空。復由性空之理不離於事。以理從事複名緣會。謂因緣會集而有諸法。或名緣集緣生等。皆意在法也。杜順和尚云離真理外無片事可得。
一義耳 義依法顯。法既理事一源。義豈容殊不可取於五名計有五法。各是一義。此中以本從末唯末非本。亦一義。攝末歸本唯本非末。亦一義。若本末混融際限不分。尤一義也。若對下不遷釋之。緣會物也。本無等理也。由一義故。即遷而不遷。所以為下不遷論宗。
何則 徴也。
一切諸法緣會而生 若色若心因緣會集。而後生起。
緣會而生則未生無有。緣離則滅 初句躡前因緣是因諸法是果。因無果有無有是處。此約前際。后句既法自緣生有為遷謝。因緣離散諸法滅謝。此約后際。
如其真有有則無滅 真謂真實。若法實有有應無滅。法
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 義理依據之前的法體來彰顯義相。法如果通達，義也就通達；法如果區別，義也就區別。這裡面四段的意義，按照它們各自的界限，是下面四論所宗奉的。依據這個根本，如果沒有宗本就無法統攝四論，沒有四論也無法闡明宗本。以法作為根本所宗奉的，那麼根本也就是以義為根本，根本也就是義。如果法和義分為兩部分，根本屬於法的時候，那就是根本的義。
『本無』（本來沒有），『實相』（真實的相），『法性』（法的本性），『性空』（本性是空），『緣會』（因緣聚合）這五個名稱，在各種經典中普遍存在。意義雖然有所差異，但不超出理和事。現在從始至終相互關聯，簡略地解釋它們。最初說緣會的事情，在緣起之前本來沒有，所以說『本無』。沒有相的相，又叫做『實相』，這個實相就是諸法的本性，所以說『法性』。這個本性是真空的，所以又說『性空』。又因為性空的道理不離於事，以理來從事，又叫做『緣會』，就是說因緣會合而有各種法，或者叫做緣集、緣生等等，都是指法的方面。杜順和尚說，離開真理之外，沒有一片事物可以得到。
一個意義罷了。意義依靠法來顯現。法既然是理和事同一個源頭，意義怎麼能不同呢？不可以從五個名稱就認為有五種法，各自是一個意義。這裡面以本從末，只有末不是本，也是一個意義。攝末歸本，只有本不是末，也是一個意義。如果本末混融，界限不分，更是一個意義。如果對照下面的『不遷』來解釋，緣會是事物，本無等是道理。因為一個意義的緣故，就是遷而不遷，所以作為下面『不遷論』的宗旨。
什麼緣故？這是提問。
一切諸法因緣聚合而產生。無論是色還是心，都是因緣會合，然後產生。
因緣聚合而產生，那麼未產生之前是沒有的；因緣離散就滅亡。前一句承接前面的因緣是因，諸法是果。因沒有果卻有，沒有卻有是這樣的。這是從前際來說。后一句說既然法是因緣生，有為遷謝，因緣離散，諸法就滅謝。這是從后際來說。
如果它是真實存在的，存在就應該沒有滅亡。法
【English Translation】 English version The meaning and principle rely on the previous Dharma-body to manifest the characteristics of meaning. If the Dharma is understood, the meaning is also understood; if the Dharma is distinct, the meaning is also distinct. The meanings of the four sections here, according to their respective boundaries, are what the following four treatises uphold. Based on this foundation, without the fundamental principle, it would be impossible to encompass the four treatises; without the four treatises, it would be impossible to elucidate the fundamental principle. Taking the Dharma as the fundamental principle, then the fundamental is also taking meaning as the fundamental, and the fundamental is meaning itself. If Dharma and meaning are divided into two parts, and the fundamental belongs to Dharma, then that is the meaning of the fundamental.
'Originally non-existent' (本無, ben wu), 'True nature' (實相, shi xiang), 'Dharma-nature' (法性, fa xing), 'Nature of emptiness' (性空, xing kong), 'Causal arising' (緣會, yuan hui) – these five terms are commonly found in various scriptures. Although the meanings may differ, they do not go beyond principle and phenomena. Now, connecting them from beginning to end, I will briefly explain them. Initially, it is said that the event of causal arising was originally non-existent before the arising of conditions, hence 'originally non-existent'. The aspect of non-aspect is also called 'True nature'; this True nature is the nature of all dharmas, hence 'Dharma-nature'. This nature is true emptiness, hence it is also called 'Nature of emptiness'. Furthermore, because the principle of the nature of emptiness is inseparable from phenomena, using principle to engage with phenomena is also called 'Causal arising', which means that various dharmas arise from the assembly of causes and conditions, or are called causal gathering, causal arising, etc., all referring to the aspect of Dharma. The Venerable Dushun said, 'Apart from true principle, not a single thing can be obtained.'
It is just one meaning. Meaning is manifested through Dharma. Since Dharma is the same source of principle and phenomena, how can meaning be different? It is not permissible to assume that there are five dharmas, each with its own meaning, based on the five terms. Here, taking the root from the branch, only the branch is not the root, which is also one meaning. Gathering the branch back to the root, only the root is not the branch, which is also one meaning. If the root and branch are mixed and the boundaries are indistinguishable, it is even more so one meaning. If we explain it in relation to the 'non-moving' below, causal arising is phenomena, and originally non-existent etc. are principles. Because of the one meaning, it is moving yet non-moving, and therefore serves as the tenet of the 'Treatise on Non-Moving'.
What is the reason? This is a question.
All dharmas arise from the assembly of causes and conditions. Whether it is form or mind, it arises from the assembly of causes and conditions.
Arising from the assembly of causes and conditions means that it did not exist before it arose; when the causes and conditions are separated, it ceases. The previous sentence connects to the preceding, where causes and conditions are the cause, and all dharmas are the effect. The cause is non-existent, yet the effect exists; non-existent yet existent is how it is. This is from the perspective of the past. The latter sentence says that since dharmas arise from causes and conditions, they are subject to change and decay; when the causes and conditions are separated, all dharmas cease. This is from the perspective of the future.
If it truly exists, then existence should not have cessation. Dharma
既隨滅。知非真有。下論云。夫有若真有豈待緣而後有哉。中觀云。法若實有則不應無等。
以此而推。故知雖今現有。有而性常自空。性常自空故謂之性空 即末顯本也。約前後際觀現在法。既但緣集而生。豈待緣離然後方滅。以因緣非和即今常離。即今亦滅。色即是空其性本然。故即緣生是性空爾。清涼聖師云。緣生無性當體即真。
性空故。故曰法性 真空是諸法之性。
法性如是。故曰實相 如是謂空也。空無相故。故名實相。
實相自無。非推之使無。故名本無 緣集之法當體元空。如映象谷響不待推斥使令無之即此實相為本無也。下論云。豈待宰割以求通哉。此揀小乘析色名空。上列名則從本及末。此中推義則自末至本。然本末镕融。非前非后非一非異也。
言不有不無者 諸經論中多明四句。謂有無亦有亦無。非有非無。依法表德。不出此四。又約破計遣謗亦有四句。謂非有非無非非有。非非無非亦有亦無。今所牒者。前之第四及后之初二句。所以偏牒此而明者。為遣二見故。遮示中道故。令心無住故為下不真空論之宗。
不如(同也)有見常見之有。邪見斷見之無耳 初約破計以釋。佛性論第三云。一切諸見不出有無二種。由有見故所以執常。于無見中復有二
【現代漢語翻譯】 既已隨緣而滅，可知其並非真實存在。下論中說：『如果存在是真實的存在，又怎麼會等待因緣和合才產生呢？』《中觀論》中說：『如果法是真實存在的，就不應該有消失的時候。』 由此推論，可知即使現在顯現存在，其存在的本性也一直是空性的。因為本性一直是空性的，所以稱之為『性空』——這便是從現象顯現其本質。從前後因緣的角度觀察現在的法，既然只是因緣聚合而生，又怎麼會等待因緣離散之後才消滅呢？因為因緣的聚合並非和諧統一，而是當下即已分離，所以當下即已消滅。色即是空，其本性本來如此，所以說因緣生起即是性空。清涼聖師說：『緣起無自性，當體即是真。』 因為是性空，所以稱為『法性』——真空是諸法的本性。 法性就是這樣，所以稱為『實相』——『如是』指的就是空。因為空沒有形相，所以稱為『實相』。 實相本來就是空無，並非通過推論才使其空無，所以稱為『本無』——因緣聚合的法，其本體原本就是空性的，如同映象和山谷的回聲，不需要推斥使其消失，這便是實相本無的含義。下論中說：『難道還需要宰割才能求得通達嗎？』這是爲了區別于小乘通過分析色法而證得空性。上面列舉名相是從本到末，這裡推論意義則是從末到本。然而，本和末是融合貫通的，不是在前也不是在後，不是單一也不是差異。 所謂『不有不無』——諸經論中大多闡明四句，即有、無、亦有亦無、非有非無。依據法來彰顯功德，不出這四句。又從破除計執、遣除誹謗的角度，也有四句，即非有、非無、非非有、非非無、非亦有亦無。現在所引用的，是前者的第四句和後者的前兩句。之所以特別引用這些來闡明，是爲了遣除兩種偏見，爲了揭示中道，爲了使心無所執著，也爲了下文『不真空論』的宗旨。 並非同於有見（認為事物真實存在的見解）中常見的『有』，以及邪見（錯誤的見解）斷見（認為事物死後斷滅的見解）中的『無』——首先從破除計執的角度來解釋。《佛性論》第三卷中說：『一切諸見都離不開有和無兩種。因為有見的緣故，所以執著于常。在無見中又有兩種情況。
【English Translation】 Since it follows conditions to cease, it is known that it is not truly existent. The lower treatise says: 'If existence were truly existent, how could it depend on conditions to arise?' The Madhyamaka (中觀, Middle Way) says: 'If a dharma (法, phenomenon/teaching) were truly existent, it should not cease.' From this reasoning, it can be known that although it appears to exist now, its nature is always empty. Because its nature is always empty, it is called 'emptiness of nature' (性空) – that is, revealing the fundamental from the manifestation. Observing the present dharma (法, phenomenon/teaching) from the perspective of past and future conditions, since it arises only from the gathering of conditions, how could it wait until the separation of conditions to cease? Because the gathering of conditions is not harmonious and unified, but is separated in the present moment, it ceases in the present moment. Form is emptiness; its nature is originally so. Therefore, arising from conditions is emptiness of nature. Because it is emptiness of nature, it is called 'dharma-nature' (法性) – true emptiness is the nature of all dharmas (法, phenomena/teachings). Dharma-nature is like this, so it is called 'reality' (實相) – 'like this' refers to emptiness. Because emptiness has no form, it is called 'reality'. Reality is originally non-existent; it is not made non-existent through reasoning, so it is called 'original non-existence' (本無) – the dharma (法, phenomenon/teaching) gathered by conditions is originally empty in its essence, like a mirror image or an echo in a valley, not needing to be pushed away to disappear. This is the meaning of reality as original non-existence. The lower treatise says: 'Does it need to be dissected to seek understanding?' This is to distinguish it from the Hinayana (小乘, Lesser Vehicle) which attains emptiness by analyzing form. The above listing of names is from the fundamental to the manifestation, while the reasoning here is from the manifestation to the fundamental. However, the fundamental and the manifestation are fused and interconnected, neither before nor after, neither one nor different. The so-called 'neither existent nor non-existent' – most sutras and treatises explain the four phrases, namely, existent, non-existent, both existent and non-existent, neither existent nor non-existent. According to the dharma (法, phenomenon/teaching) to manifest merit, it does not go beyond these four phrases. Also, from the perspective of refuting attachments and dispelling slander, there are also four phrases, namely, not existent, not non-existent, not not-existent, not not-non-existent, not both existent and non-existent. What is quoted now is the fourth phrase of the former and the first two phrases of the latter. The reason for specifically quoting these to clarify is to dispel two kinds of biases, to reveal the Middle Way, to make the mind unattached, and also for the purpose of the 'Treatise on Not Emptying Emptiness' (不真空論). It is not the 'existence' commonly seen in the view of existence (有見, the view that things truly exist), nor the 'non-existence' in the heretical view (邪見, wrong view) of annihilation (斷見, the view that things are completely annihilated after death) – first, explain from the perspective of refuting attachments. The third volume of the Buddha-nature Treatise (佛性論) says: 'All views cannot be separated from the two kinds of existence and non-existence. Because of the view of existence, one clings to permanence. In the view of non-existence, there are two situations.
種。一邪見。謂一切無因無果並撥三世故。二斷見謂唯有現在不信未來故。準此因有生常。因無生邪斷之二也。故論雙敘之。經中為破此見而云不有不無。論敘云。不同計有之見是常見之有。故云。不有不同計無之見。是邪見斷見之無。故云不無。不如二言貫下邪斷。
若以(猶執也)有為有(常也)則以無為無(斷也)有既不有則無無也 約起滅釋也。初二句明相因而起。但起一見一見隨生。如見牛有角謂兔無角等。故密嚴云。要待于有法而起于無見。此所治之病也。后二句明相因而滅。茍治一見一見隨亡。經中既云非有。故亦非無。故密嚴云。有法本自無無見何所待。此能治之藥也。偉哉善巧曲盡經旨。
夫欲存(猶取也)無以觀法者。可謂識法實相矣。是謂雖觀有。而無所取相 約觀行釋也。法即緣生諸法。謂從緣雖空不可存無以觀。無則三學六度與五逆十惡空而無果。由非無故一切法皆立也。不取相者。謂緣起雖有亦不可取相以觀。取則有為生滅行何契真。由非有故心不住相。建一功立一德靡不合道。如斯見法方識實相。實相之言在上義屬於下。即中道佛性觀也。此中意趣無邊不能繁敘。如涅槃及止觀等說。上三義釋名。前二離過後一成行。
然則法相為無相之相。聖人之心為住無所住矣
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 種。一、邪見（認為一切事物沒有原因和結果，否定過去、現在、未來三世的錯誤見解）。認為一切事物沒有原因和結果，並且否定過去、現在、未來三世。二、斷見（認為只有現在，不相信未來的錯誤見解）。認為只有現在，不相信未來。按照這個道理，因為有，所以產生常的觀念；因為沒有，所以產生邪見和斷見的兩種觀念。所以《瑜伽師地論》同時敘述這兩種見解。經文中爲了破除這種見解，所以說『不有不無』。《瑜伽師地論》敘述說：不同於計執『有』的見解，那是常見的『有』，所以說『不有』；不同於計執『無』的見解，那是邪見和斷見的『無』，所以說『不無』。『不如』這兩個字貫穿下面的邪見和斷見。
如果執著于『有』為『有』（常），那麼就會執著于『無』為『無』（斷）。『有』既然不是真正的『有』，那麼『無』也不是真正的『無』。這是從生起和滅去的角度來解釋。前面的兩句說明相互依存而生起。只要生起一種見解，另一種見解就會隨之產生。例如，看到牛有角，就認為兔子沒有角等等。所以《密嚴經》說：『一定要依賴於有法，才會生起無見。』這就是所要治療的病。後面的兩句說明相互依存而滅去。如果治療了一種見解，另一種見解就會隨之消失。經文中既然說『非有』，所以也『非無』。所以《密嚴經》說：『有法本來就是空無，無見又依賴於什麼呢？』這是能治療的藥。真是巧妙啊，完全表達了經文的旨意。
想要保持（選取）『無』來觀察諸法的人，可以說是真正認識了諸法的實相。這就是說，雖然觀察到『有』，但卻不執著于任何表相。這是從觀行角度來解釋。『法』就是緣起諸法。意思是說，雖然諸法從因緣生起是空性的，但也不能保持『無』的觀念來觀察。如果執著于『無』，那麼三學（戒、定、慧）、六度（佈施、持戒、忍辱、精進、禪定、般若）與五逆（殺父、殺母、殺阿羅漢、出佛身血、破和合僧）、十惡（殺生、偷盜、邪淫、妄語、兩舌、惡口、綺語、貪慾、嗔恚、邪見）就會落空而沒有結果。正因為不是『無』，所以一切法才能成立。不執著于表相，意思是說，雖然緣起是『有』，但也不能執著于表相來觀察。如果執著于表相，那麼有為的生滅行又怎麼能契合真理呢？正因為不是『有』，所以心才不會停留在表相上。建立一個功德，樹立一個德行，沒有不符合道的。像這樣見法，才能認識實相。『實相』這個詞，在上面的意義上屬於下面的內容，就是中道佛性的觀想。這裡面的意趣無邊無際，不能詳細敘述。就像《涅槃經》和《止觀》等所說的那樣。上面的三種解釋，前兩種是離過，后一種是成行。
如此說來，法相就是無相之相，聖人的心就是安住于無所安住之處。
【English Translation】 English version: Seeds. First, Wrong View (a mistaken view that everything has no cause and effect, and denies the three periods of past, present, and future). It means believing that everything has no cause and effect and denying the three periods of past, present, and future. Second, Annihilationism (a mistaken view that only the present exists and does not believe in the future). It means believing that only the present exists and not believing in the future. According to this principle, because of 'existence', the concept of permanence arises; because of 'non-existence', the two concepts of wrong view and annihilationism arise. Therefore, the Yogacarabhumi-sastra simultaneously describes these two views. In the sutras, to refute this view, it is said 'neither existent nor non-existent.' The Yogacarabhumi-sastra narrates: 'Different from the view that clings to 'existence', that is the 'existence' of eternalism, so it is said 'not existent'; different from the view that clings to 'non-existence', that is the 'non-existence' of wrong view and annihilationism, so it is said 'not non-existent.' The words 'not like' connect to the wrong view and annihilationism below.
If one clings to 'existence' as 'existence' (permanence), then one will cling to 'non-existence' as 'non-existence' (annihilation). Since 'existence' is not truly 'existence', then 'non-existence' is also not truly 'non-existence'. This is explained from the perspective of arising and ceasing. The first two sentences explain that they arise interdependently. As long as one view arises, the other view will follow. For example, seeing that a cow has horns, one thinks that a rabbit has no horns, and so on. Therefore, the Sri-mala-devi-simhanada-sutra says: 'One must rely on the existence of phenomena to give rise to the view of non-existence.' This is the disease to be treated. The last two sentences explain that they cease interdependently. If one view is treated, the other view will disappear. Since the sutra says 'not existent', then it is also 'not non-existent'. Therefore, the Sri-mala-devi-simhanada-sutra says: 'Phenomena are originally empty, so what does the view of non-existence rely on?' This is the medicine that can cure. How skillful, completely expressing the meaning of the sutra.
Those who wish to maintain (choose) 'non-existence' to observe phenomena can be said to truly understand the real nature of phenomena. This means that although one observes 'existence', one does not cling to any appearances. This is explained from the perspective of contemplation and practice. 'Phenomena' are the phenomena that arise from conditions. It means that although phenomena arise from conditions and are empty in nature, one cannot maintain the concept of 'non-existence' to observe them. If one clings to 'non-existence', then the Three Learnings (sila, samadhi, prajna), the Six Perfections (dana, sila, ksanti, virya, dhyana, prajna), the Five Heinous Offenses (matricide, patricide, killing an arhat, injuring a Buddha, creating schism in the sangha), and the Ten Evils (killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, lying, divisive speech, harsh speech, idle chatter, greed, hatred, wrong view) will become empty and without result. Precisely because it is not 'non-existence', all phenomena can be established. Not clinging to appearances means that although arising from conditions is 'existence', one cannot cling to appearances to observe them. If one clings to appearances, then how can conditioned phenomena of arising and ceasing accord with the truth? Precisely because it is not 'existence', the mind will not dwell on appearances. Establishing a merit, establishing a virtue, there is nothing that does not accord with the Tao. Seeing phenomena in this way, one can recognize the real nature. The word 'real nature', in the meaning above, belongs to the content below, which is the contemplation of the Middle Way Buddha-nature. The meaning here is boundless and cannot be described in detail, as explained in the Nirvana Sutra and Samatha-vipassana, etc. The above three explanations, the first two are to avoid faults, and the last one is to accomplish practice.
Therefore, the characteristics of phenomena are the characteristics of no-characteristics, and the mind of a sage dwells in the place of no-dwelling.
法相者。所觀之境屬前實相也。既非有無何有相狀。且對無住之心。義言相爾故。云無相之相。聖人等者。能觀之心得無分別。俱名聖人。然地前修真如三昧者。亦許仿行雙照有無名住。既不存無。又不取相即住而無住也。性宗修人雖具縛凡夫。茍有夙熏誠可留心。今舉聖心令人慕式也。
三乘等觀性空而得道也。性空者。謂諸法實相也 等謂平等。道謂自乘菩提。所以約人辨者。恐疑實相之外別有三乘異證。而不知三乘機器隨熏有差所觀性空無異。故身子云。我等同入法性。佛贊迦葉同一解脫。亦如三獸渡河河無異水。
見法實相故云正觀。若其異者便為邪觀 正邪二觀諸經通說。今約實相辨邪正也。大論云。除實相外余皆魔事。
設二乘不見此理。則顛倒也 此有二說。一則只是三乘中二乘。意云。設若小乘不見性空之理。則亦顛倒不克果證。以二乘但見無常。不見於常是顛倒故。此則大小形對可說。小且尚耳。況大乘耶。二則前云三乘。乃通教所被學法空者。故同觀實相為正觀。今此二乘乃藏教所被愚法者。意云。設若愚法二乘亦須觀性空之理而取證。若不見此理則顛倒故不證。大疏破有教引成實云。我今正明三藏中實義。實義即空。清涼鈔云。不可不見實義而得道也。以生空亦雙空之一
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『法相』指的是所觀的境界，屬於前面的『實相』。既然不是『有』也不是『無』，哪裡還有什麼相狀可言呢？而且是針對執著于『住』的心而言，所以勉強稱之為『相』，因此說是『無相之相』。『聖人等』指的是能觀的心達到沒有分別的境界，都可以稱為聖人。然而，在地前修習真如三昧的人，也可以效仿這種雙照『有』和『無』的狀態，名為『住』。既不執著于『無』，也不執取于『相』，這就是『住而無住』的境界。性宗修習的人即使是具縛凡夫（指被煩惱束縛的凡夫），如果宿世有熏習，也值得留意。現在舉出聖人的心境，是爲了讓人仰慕傚法。
『三乘等觀性空而得道』，這裡的『性空』指的是諸法的實相。『等』指的是平等，『道』指的是各自所證的菩提（覺悟）。之所以要從人的角度來辨析，是恐怕有人懷疑在實相之外，還有三乘不同的證悟。實際上，三乘的根器隨著熏習而有差別，但所觀的性空之理並沒有不同。所以舍利弗（Śāriputra，佛陀十大弟子之一，以智慧著稱）說：『我們都同樣進入法性。』佛陀讚歎迦葉（Kāśyapa，佛陀的弟子，以頭陀行著稱）證得同一解脫，也像三隻動物渡河，河水並沒有不同。
『見法實相故云正觀，若其異者便為邪觀』。『正觀』和『邪觀』在各種經典中都有提到，這裡是從實相的角度來辨別邪正。《大智度論》（Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra）中說：『除了實相之外，其餘都是魔事。』
『設二乘不見此理，則顛倒也』。對此有兩種說法。一種說法是，這裡的『二乘』只是三乘中的二乘，意思是說，如果小乘（Śrāvakayāna，聲聞乘）不見性空之理，那麼也是顛倒，不能證得果位。因為二乘只見到無常，沒有見到常，所以是顛倒。這是大小乘的對比。小乘尚且如此，更何況大乘呢？另一種說法是，前面說的『三乘』，是通教（一種佛教教義分類）所教化的學習法空的人，所以共同觀實相為正觀。現在說的『二乘』，是藏教（一種佛教教義分類）所教化的愚法者，意思是說，如果愚法二乘也必須觀性空之理才能證果，如果不見此理，那麼就是顛倒，不能證果。《大疏》爲了破斥有教，引用《成實論》（Satyasiddhi-śāstra）說：『我現在正是闡明三藏（Tripiṭaka，佛教經典的總稱）中的實義。』實義就是空。清涼澄觀（Qingliang Chengguan，華嚴宗的代表人物）的《鈔》中說：『不可以不見實義而得道。』因為生空也是雙空之一。
【English Translation】 English version: 'Dharma-lakṣaṇa' (法相, Dharma characteristic) refers to the realm being observed, which belongs to the aforementioned 'real aspect' (實相, reality). Since it is neither 'existence' nor 'non-existence,' where can any characteristics be found? Moreover, it is directed towards the mind that clings to 'abiding' (住, dwelling). Therefore, it is tentatively called 'lakṣaṇa,' hence the saying 'the characteristic of no-characteristic' (無相之相, lakṣaṇa of no-lakṣaṇa). 'Saints, etc.' (聖人等, ārya, etc.) refers to the mind capable of observing that has attained a state of no-discrimination, all of which can be called saints. However, those who cultivate the True Thusness Samādhi (真如三昧, True Thusness Samādhi) before reaching the bhūmis (地, stages of a Bodhisattva's path) can also emulate this state of dual illumination of 'existence' and 'non-existence,' called 'abiding.' Neither clinging to 'non-existence' nor grasping at 'characteristics,' this is the state of 'abiding without abiding' (住而無住, dwelling without dwelling). Even if those who cultivate according to the nature school (性宗, nature school) are still bound ordinary beings (具縛凡夫, bound ordinary beings), if they have good roots from past lives, it is worth paying attention to. Now, the state of mind of a saint is presented to inspire admiration and emulation.
'The Three Vehicles equally contemplate emptiness of nature and attain the Path' (三乘等觀性空而得道). Here, 'emptiness of nature' (性空, emptiness of nature) refers to the real aspect of all dharmas. 'Equally' (等, equally) refers to equality, and 'Path' (道, Path) refers to the Bodhi (菩提, enlightenment) attained by each vehicle. The reason for analyzing from the perspective of people is to prevent the doubt that there are different attainments of the Three Vehicles (三乘, Three Vehicles) outside of the real aspect. In reality, the capacities of the Three Vehicles differ according to their conditioning, but the principle of emptiness of nature being observed is the same. Therefore, Śāriputra (舍利弗, one of the Buddha's ten great disciples, known for his wisdom) said, 'We all enter the Dharma-nature equally.' The Buddha praised Kāśyapa (迦葉, one of the Buddha's disciples, known for his ascetic practices) for attaining the same liberation, just like three animals crossing a river, the water is the same.
'Seeing the real aspect of the Dharma is called right view; if it is different, it is called wrong view' (見法實相故云正觀，若其異者便為邪觀). 'Right view' (正觀, right view) and 'wrong view' (邪觀, wrong view) are mentioned in various scriptures. Here, they are distinguished from the perspective of the real aspect. The Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra (大智度論, Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom) says, 'Apart from the real aspect, everything else is the work of Māra (魔, demon).'
'If the Two Vehicles do not see this principle, then it is inverted' (設二乘不見此理，則顛倒也). There are two interpretations of this. One interpretation is that the 'Two Vehicles' (二乘, Two Vehicles) here refers only to the two vehicles within the Three Vehicles, meaning that if the Śrāvakayāna (聲聞乘, Hearer Vehicle) does not see the principle of emptiness of nature, then it is also inverted and cannot attain the fruit. Because the Two Vehicles only see impermanence and do not see permanence, it is inverted. This is a comparison between the Great Vehicle and the Small Vehicle. If the Small Vehicle is like this, how much more so is the Great Vehicle? The other interpretation is that the 'Three Vehicles' mentioned earlier refers to those who are taught by the Common Teaching (通教, Common Teaching) and study the emptiness of dharmas, so they all contemplate the real aspect as right view. The 'Two Vehicles' mentioned now refers to those who are taught by the Treasury Teaching (藏教, Treasury Teaching) and are ignorant of the Dharma, meaning that if the ignorant Two Vehicles also need to contemplate the principle of emptiness of nature in order to attain the fruit. If they do not see this principle, then it is inverted and cannot attain the fruit. The Great Commentary (大疏, Great Commentary), in order to refute the teaching of existence, quotes the Satyasiddhi-śāstra (成實論, Treatise on the Establishment of Truth) saying, 'I am now precisely explaining the real meaning within the Tripiṭaka (三藏, Three Baskets). The real meaning is emptiness.' Qingliang Chengguan's (清涼澄觀, a representative figure of the Huayan school) Commentary (鈔, Commentary) says, 'One cannot attain the Path without seeing the real meaning.' Because the emptiness of self is also one of the dual emptinesses.
分。又何太異。故前云等觀。
是以三乘觀法無異。但心有大小為差耳 所趣實相唯一。能趣根宜成異。器有廣狹智有淺深。運有自他進有迂直證有單雙。此則差在於人不在於法。
漚和般若者。大慧之稱(名也)也 雙牒其名通屬其體。智論第十八云。摩訶般若秦言大慧。漚和者。此云方便。一念兼之故名大慧。二乘孤慧獨穎慧而非大。為下般若一論之宗。
見法實相謂之般若。能不形(猶顯也)證漚和功也 初二句明得名。由見實相故名般若。后二句見而非證。直由大悲導智。令不證空。出二乘也。凈名云。無方便慧縛有方便慧解。以無悲之智醉寂滅酒。墮無為坑故。
適(往也)化眾生謂之漚和。不染塵累(去聲)般若力也 亦初二句明得名。由化眾生故名方便。后二句化而不染。復由大智導悲令塵不染。異凡夫也。凈名云。無慧方便縛有慧方便解。以無慧方便投愛見網沒有相林。故塵謂五欲塵境。累謂生死過患。
然則般若之門觀空。漚和之門涉有。涉有而未始(暫也)迷虛。故常處(居也)有而不染。不厭(棄也)有而觀空故。觀空而不證 承前以即不滯也。初二句約觀空有以分權實。涅槃為空生死為有。后四句正顯不滯。以二智雙融之一心。觀空有無二之真諦。如觀色是
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 有什麼太大的區別呢？所以前面說的是等同的觀察。 因此，三乘（Sravakayana，Pratyekabuddhayana，Bodhisattvayana）的觀法沒有區別，只是心量有大小的差別罷了。所趨向的實相只有一個，而能趨向的根器和因緣各有不同。根器有廣狹，智慧有深淺，修行有自利和利他，進步有迂迴和直接，證悟有單一和雙運。這些差別在於人，而不在於法。 『漚和』（Upaya）和『般若』（Prajna）是指大智慧的稱謂（名稱）。重複使用這兩個名稱是爲了貫通它們的本體。智度論第十八卷說：『摩訶般若』（Mahaprajna）在秦語中譯為『大慧』。『漚和』在這裡的意思是『方便』。一念之間兼具兩者，所以稱為『大慧』。二乘（Sravakayana，Pratyekabuddhayana）的智慧是孤立的，獨自突出，雖然是智慧但不是大智慧。這是下面關於般若的論述的宗旨。 見到法的實相叫做『般若』，能夠不顯現證悟是『漚和』（Upaya）的功用。前兩句說明得名的原因，因為見到實相所以叫做『般若』。后兩句說的是見到實相但沒有證悟，直接由大悲引導智慧，使之不證入空性，從而區別於二乘。維摩經說：『沒有方便的智慧是束縛，有方便的智慧是解脫。』因為沒有悲心的智慧，所以會沉醉於寂滅的酒，墮入無為的深坑。 前往教化眾生叫做『漚和』（Upaya），不沾染塵世的煩惱是『般若』（Prajna）的力量。也是前兩句說明得名的原因，因為教化眾生所以叫做『方便』。后兩句說的是教化眾生而不被沾染，又是由於大智慧引導大悲，使塵世的煩惱不能沾染。這與凡夫不同。維摩經說：『沒有智慧的方便是束縛，有智慧的方便是解脫。』因為沒有智慧的方便，所以會投入愛見之網，沒入有相的樹林。所以塵指的是五欲塵境，累指的是生死的過患。 既然這樣，那麼般若之門是觀空，漚和之門是涉有。涉入有而未曾暫時迷惑于虛妄，所以常居於有而不被沾染。不厭棄有而觀空，所以觀空而不證入。承接前面所說，是爲了說明即空即有，不滯于任何一邊。前兩句是根據觀空和觀有來區分權巧和真實。涅槃是空，生死是有。后四句正是爲了顯示不滯于任何一邊。用二智雙融的一顆心，來觀察空有不二的真諦，就像觀察色蘊一樣。
【English Translation】 English version: What great difference is there? Therefore, it was previously said that they are equal observations. Therefore, the methods of observation of the Three Vehicles (Sravakayana, Pratyekabuddhayana, Bodhisattvayana) are not different; it is only that the mind has differences in size. The actual reality to which they tend is only one, but the faculties and conditions that can tend to it are different. Vessels have breadth and narrowness, wisdom has shallowness and depth, practice has self-benefit and benefiting others, progress has indirectness and directness, and realization has singleness and duality. These differences lie in people, not in the Dharma. 'Upaya' (漚和) and 'Prajna' (般若) are terms for great wisdom (name). Repeating these two names is to connect their substance. The eighteenth volume of the Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra says: 'Mahaprajna' (摩訶般若) is translated as 'Great Wisdom' in the Qin language. 'Upaya' here means 'skillful means'. Having both in one thought is called 'Great Wisdom'. The wisdom of the Two Vehicles (Sravakayana, Pratyekabuddhayana) is isolated and stands out alone; although it is wisdom, it is not great wisdom. This is the doctrine of the following discussion on Prajna. Seeing the actual reality of the Dharma is called 'Prajna' (般若), and being able to not manifest realization is the function of 'Upaya' (漚和). The first two sentences explain the reason for the name, because seeing the actual reality is called 'Prajna'. The latter two sentences say that seeing the actual reality but not realizing it is directly guided by great compassion, so that it does not realize emptiness, thereby distinguishing it from the Two Vehicles. The Vimalakirti Sutra says: 'Wisdom without skillful means is bondage, and wisdom with skillful means is liberation.' Because there is no wisdom of compassion, one will be drunk with the wine of tranquility and fall into the pit of non-action. Going to teach sentient beings is called 'Upaya' (漚和), and not being contaminated by the defilements of the world is the power of 'Prajna' (般若). The first two sentences also explain the reason for the name, because teaching sentient beings is called 'skillful means'. The latter two sentences say that teaching sentient beings without being contaminated is again due to great wisdom guiding great compassion, so that the defilements of the world cannot contaminate. This is different from ordinary people. The Vimalakirti Sutra says: 'Skillful means without wisdom is bondage, and skillful means with wisdom is liberation.' Because there are no skillful means of wisdom, one will be thrown into the net of love and views and submerged in the forest of appearances. Therefore, defilement refers to the defilements of the five desires, and accumulation refers to the faults of birth and death. Since this is the case, then the gate of Prajna is to contemplate emptiness, and the gate of Upaya is to engage in existence. Engaging in existence without ever being temporarily deluded by illusion, therefore, one always dwells in existence without being contaminated. Not being disgusted with existence but contemplating emptiness, therefore, one contemplates emptiness without realizing it. Continuing from what was said earlier is to explain that it is neither emptiness nor existence, and one is not attached to either side. The first two sentences are based on contemplating emptiness and contemplating existence to distinguish between expediency and reality. Nirvana is emptiness, and birth and death are existence. The latter four sentences are precisely to show that one is not attached to either side. Using a mind in which the two wisdoms are fused, one observes the true reality of non-duality of emptiness and existence, just like observing the skandha of form.
有色即空。故豈曾瞥然而迷性空。以不迷空。所以常居有境塵不能染。下句反此可知。是謂二諦相符二行相資。如車二輪。猶鳥二翼。翔空致遠互缺無能。由空門出生死入涅槃。由有門建佛法化眾生。然理量無二生涅一如故。不滯空而累有也。
是謂一念之力權慧具矣。一念之力權慧具矣 念謂慧念。言一者極少時也。權謂權智即前方便。慧謂實智即前般若。謂少時一念二智俱備。再言之者嘆其智妙。
好思歷然可解 歷然者謂。理甚昭著。歷歷分明可領解也。
泥洹盡諦者 華梵雙出。古譯滅諦為盡諦。盡義在下。此亦牒經而釋。為下無名論之宗直結盡而已 結謂一切結使亦兼諸業。即集諦也。然約喻明。如世繩結最難解理。
則生死永滅。故謂盡耳 生死苦諦也。連前即三雜染亦名三障。此三種障更相由藉能障涅槃。今約治道總說云盡。若別說者。即十惡等業信位能滅。惑有本末。本即根本不覺末即枝末不覺。末中復有七類。謂三細四粗。生死亦二。一分段二變易。自地前三賢斷粗中粗。又復觀察學斷根本無明。自見道中至七地時斷粗中細。爾時分段盡也。自八地至盡地。斷黎耶三細根本無明。爾時變易亦亡。以此論宗於一乘。故唯依起信釋之。細示如彼。
無復別有一盡處爾
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『有』的本質即是『空』（色即空）。因此，難道會稍微地迷惑于自性的空性嗎？正因為不迷惑于空性，所以才能常處於『有』的境界，而不被塵世所污染。下一句反過來說明，由此可知，這就是二諦（真諦和俗諦）相互符合，二行（空觀和有觀）相互資助，如同車子的兩個輪子，好比鳥的兩隻翅膀。在天空中飛翔以達到遠方，互相缺少任何一方都無法做到。通過空門，可以脫離生死，進入涅槃（泥洹）；通過有門，可以建立佛法，化度眾生。然而，從理上來說，空和有並非二元對立，生死和涅槃本質上是一樣的。因此，不執著于空，也不會被有所束縛。
這就是說，一念之間就具備了權智和實智。一念之間就具備了權智和實智。『念』指的是智慧的念頭。說『一』，是指極短的時間。『權』指的是權巧的智慧，也就是前面的方便。『慧』指的是真實的智慧，也就是前面的般若。意思是說，在極短的一念之間，就具備了兩種智慧。再次強調，是讚歎這種智慧的精妙。
好好思考，就能清楚地理解。『歷然』指的是道理非常顯著，清清楚楚，可以領會理解。
『泥洹盡諦』：這是梵語和漢語的結合。古時候翻譯的滅諦，就是盡諦。『盡』的含義在下面。這裡也是引用經文來解釋，爲了下面《無名論》的宗旨，直接歸結于『盡』。『結』指的是一切煩惱結使，也包括各種業。也就是集諦。用比喻來說明，就像世間的繩結，最難解開。
那麼生死就永遠滅除了。所以稱為『盡』。生死是苦諦。連同前面所說的，就是三種雜染，也稱為三種障礙。這三種障礙互相依賴，能夠阻礙涅槃。現在從修行的角度總的來說，就是『盡』。如果分別來說，就是十惡等業，信位就能滅除。迷惑有根本和枝末。根本就是根本的不覺，枝末就是枝末的不覺。枝末中又有七類，就是三細四粗。生死也有兩種，一種是分段生死，一種是變易生死。自地前三賢斷除粗中之粗。又通過觀察學習，斷除根本無明。從見道位到七地時，斷除粗中之細。這時分段生死就盡了。從八地到盡地，斷除阿賴耶識的三細根本無明。這時變易生死也消失了。因為這部論的宗旨在於一乘，所以只依據《起信論》來解釋。詳細的說明可以參考《起信論》。
沒有另外一個『盡處』了。
【English Translation】 English version: 'Form is emptiness.' Therefore, how could one be even slightly deluded by the emptiness of self-nature? Precisely because one is not deluded by emptiness, one can constantly reside in the realm of 'existence' without being tainted by the dust of the world. The following sentence states the opposite, from which it can be understood that this is the mutual agreement of the two truths (ultimate truth and conventional truth), and the mutual support of the two practices (the contemplation of emptiness and the contemplation of existence), like the two wheels of a cart, or the two wings of a bird. To soar in the sky and reach afar, neither can be lacking. Through the gate of emptiness, one can escape birth and death and enter Nirvana (Nirvana); through the gate of existence, one can establish the Buddha-dharma and transform sentient beings. However, in principle, emptiness and existence are not dualistic, and birth-death and Nirvana are essentially the same. Therefore, one is not attached to emptiness, nor is one burdened by existence.
This means that in a single thought, both expedient wisdom and true wisdom are complete. In a single thought, both expedient wisdom and true wisdom are complete. 'Thought' refers to the thought of wisdom. Saying 'one' refers to an extremely short time. 'Expedient' refers to expedient wisdom, which is the preceding means. 'Wisdom' refers to true wisdom, which is the preceding prajna. It means that in an extremely short moment of thought, both kinds of wisdom are complete. Repeating it is to praise the subtlety of this wisdom.
Think carefully, and it can be clearly understood. 'Clearly' means that the principle is very obvious, clear and distinct, and can be understood.
'Nirvana, the Truth of Extinction': This is a combination of Sanskrit and Chinese. The ancient translation of the Truth of Cessation is the Truth of Extinction. The meaning of 'extinction' is below. This is also quoting the sutras to explain, for the purpose of the following 'Nameless Treatise,' directly concluding with 'extinction.' 'Knots' refers to all afflictions and bonds, including various karmas. This is the Truth of Accumulation. To explain using a metaphor, it is like the knots of rope in the world, which are the most difficult to untie.
Then birth and death will be extinguished forever. Therefore, it is called 'extinction.' Birth and death are the Truth of Suffering. Together with what was said before, these are the three impurities, also called the three obstacles. These three obstacles are mutually dependent and can obstruct Nirvana. Now, from the perspective of practice, it is generally said to be 'extinction.' If explained separately, it is that the ten evils and other karmas can be extinguished by the stage of faith. Delusions have roots and branches. The root is the fundamental non-awakening, and the branches are the non-awakening of the branches. Among the branches, there are seven categories, namely the three subtle and the four coarse. Birth and death are also of two kinds, one is segmented birth and death, and the other is transformational birth and death. The three sages before the ground cut off the coarsest of the coarse. Furthermore, through observation and learning, the fundamental ignorance is cut off. From the stage of seeing the path to the seventh ground, the coarse of the subtle is cut off. At this time, segmented birth and death are exhausted. From the eighth ground to the ground of exhaustion, the three subtle fundamental ignorances of the alaya consciousness are cut off. At this time, transformational birth and death also disappear. Because the purpose of this treatise lies in the One Vehicle, it is only explained according to the Awakening of Faith. Detailed explanations can be found in the Awakening of Faith.
There is no other 'place of extinction.'
涅槃二十五云。涅槃之體無有住處。直是諸佛斷煩惱處。故名涅槃。等非如小乘以生死世間涅槃出世間。大乘但轉此三即涅槃爾。豈別標其方域耶。故本論云。排方外之談云云。何者。夫三德秘藏是大涅槃。但因翻此三障得名。謂惑能障于般若。惑盡而般若明。業能障于解脫。業亡而解脫朗。苦能障於法身。苦謝而法身顯。故此三德但約障說。豈別有一盡處爾。又三德一體不併不別。如梵(伊字)雖四德圓常恒沙義備。一心融拂非相非名。尤可說云無復別有一盡處爾。以此為宗無名已顯。
物不遷論第一 物即緣會諸法。謂染凈依正古今寒暑等。不遷即性空實相等。以緣生之物本性即空。空即實相故。物物皆不遷也。今約終頓二教之義。略示玄妙。初終教者。謂隨緣之理起成諸事。即事同真故遷即不遷。此中曲有三門。一以理從事理亦隨遷。況事法邪。楞伽經略云。如來藏與因俱有生滅。又不增減經云。法身流轉五道云云。皆此義也。二以事從理事且不遷。況真理邪。仁王經云。煩惱菩提于第一義而無二故。諸佛如來與一切法悉皆如故。楞伽又云。五識身非流轉。三此二無礙同時镕融。非一非異。遷與不遷亦非前後。即涅槃娑羅娑鳥。凈名法無去來常不住故是也。清涼云。因乖常理遂成三界無常。茍悟無常之實
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 《涅槃經》第二十五卷說：『涅槃的本體沒有固定的處所，只是諸佛斷除煩惱的地方，所以叫做涅槃。』這不同於小乘認為生死是世間的，涅槃是出世間的。大乘只是轉化這三種障礙就達到涅槃，難道還需要另外標明一個區域嗎？所以《本論》說：『排除方外的談論』等等。為什麼呢？因為三德秘藏就是大涅槃，只是因為翻轉這三種障礙才得到這個名稱。所謂迷惑能障礙般若，迷惑消除而般若就顯明；業能障礙解脫，業消失而解脫就明朗；苦能障礙法身，苦消退而法身就顯現。所以這三種德性只是針對障礙來說的，難道另外還有一個終結之處嗎？而且三德是一體的，不併列也不分離。比如梵字（伊字），雖然具備四德，圓滿、常、恒、沙的意義都具備，一心融合拂拭，既不是相也不是名，尤其可以說沒有另外一個終結之處。以這個作為宗旨，無名已經顯現。 《物不遷論》第一篇：物，就是因緣和合的諸法，包括染凈、依正、古今、寒暑等等。不遷，就是性空、實相等。因為因緣所生的事物，其本性就是空，空就是實相，所以萬物都是不遷的。現在根據終教和頓教的意義，簡略地闡釋其中的玄妙。首先，終教認為，隨順因緣的道理而生起成就諸事，即事就是真，所以遷就是不遷。這裡面委婉地包含三個方面：一、以理從事，理也隨著遷變，更何況事法呢？《楞伽經》簡略地說：『如來藏與因同時具有生滅。』《不增不減經》說：『法身流轉五道』等等，都是這個意思。二、以事從事理，事且不遷變，更何況真理呢？《仁王經》說：『煩惱和菩提在第一義諦上沒有差別，所以諸佛如來與一切法都保持原樣。』《楞伽經》又說：『五識身不流轉。』三、這二者沒有障礙，同時融合，非一非異，遷與不遷也沒有先後。就像涅槃的娑羅樹和娑羅鳥，《維摩詰經》說：『法無去來，常不住』就是這個意思。清涼澄觀大師說：『因為違背常理，所以形成三界無常。如果領悟無常的實相，』
【English Translation】 English version: Nirvana Sutra, Volume 25, states: 'The substance of Nirvana has no fixed abode; it is simply the place where all Buddhas extinguish their afflictions, hence it is called Nirvana.' This differs from the Hinayana view that samsara is worldly and Nirvana is otherworldly. Mahayana simply transforms these three obstacles to attain Nirvana; is there a need to separately designate a region? Therefore, the Treatise states: 'Rejecting discussions of what is beyond.' Why? Because the Threefold Secret Treasure is the Great Nirvana, and it is named only because of reversing these three obstacles. It is said that delusion obstructs Prajna (wisdom), and when delusion is extinguished, Prajna becomes clear; karma obstructs liberation, and when karma ceases, liberation becomes manifest; suffering obstructs the Dharmakaya (Dharma body), and when suffering subsides, the Dharmakaya appears. Therefore, these three virtues are only spoken of in relation to obstacles; is there another place of cessation? Moreover, the three virtues are one entity, neither together nor separate. For example, the Sanskrit letter 'I' (伊字), although it possesses the four virtues, complete, constant, eternal, and like the sands of the Ganges, the meaning is complete. With one mind, merging and wiping away, neither a form nor a name, it can especially be said that there is no other place of cessation. Taking this as the principle, the nameless has already become manifest. Treatise on the Non-Moving of Things, Chapter 1: 'Things' are the dharmas (法) that arise from causal conditions, including defilement and purity, dependent and principal, ancient and modern, cold and heat, and so on. 'Non-moving' refers to emptiness of inherent existence (性空), suchness (實相), and so on. Because things arising from conditions are inherently empty, and emptiness is suchness, all things are non-moving. Now, based on the meaning of the Teaching of Completion (終教) and the Sudden Teaching (頓教), I will briefly explain the profound mystery. First, the Teaching of Completion holds that the principle of following conditions gives rise to and accomplishes all things; that is, things are the same as truth, so moving is non-moving. Here, there are three aspects: 1. Taking principle as the basis for things, principle also changes along with things, let alone the dharmas of things. The Lankavatara Sutra briefly states: 'The Tathagatagarbha (如來藏) has arising and ceasing together with causes.' The Sutra on No Increase No Decrease says: 'The Dharmakaya transmigrates through the five paths,' and so on, all of which have this meaning. 2. Taking things as the basis for principle, things do not change, let alone the true principle. The Benevolent Kings Sutra says: 'Afflictions and Bodhi (菩提) are not different in the ultimate meaning, so all Buddhas and Tathagatas remain the same as all dharmas.' The Lankavatara Sutra also says: 'The five consciousnesses do not transmigrate.' 3. These two are without obstruction, simultaneously merging, neither one nor different, and moving and non-moving are neither before nor after. Like the Sala tree and the Sarasa bird in Nirvana, the Vimalakirti Sutra says: 'Dharma has no coming or going, and constantly does not abide,' which is this meaning. Qingliang Chengguan (清涼澄觀) says: 'Because of violating the constant principle, the three realms become impermanent. If one realizes the reality of impermanence,'
。即無常常矣。下論大義皆是此理。后頓教者。謂法法本真妄見流動。若一念不生前後際斷。法非生滅非遷非不遷。仍名不遷也。華嚴云。一切法無生云云。若依歸峰略鈔解。緣生之法相同遍計似生似滅。性同圓成不生不滅。亦終教意也。今此論中雙含二教。如下云。不釋動以求靜云云。又云。目對真而莫覺。
夫生死(滅也)交謝寒暑迭(互也)遷。有物流動人之常情 將明遷即不遷之理。先陳迷倒不遷見遷之情。令忘情悟實也。初句舉所遷之法。通一切法生來死謝。死至生亡生滅相待。故云交也。次句舉能遷之時。通一切時迭遷可知。有謂緣有流動遷也。后句中義兼凡外。亦正為權小以一形三。唯見無常不見即常者。皆常情淺見也。
予(我也)則謂之不然 論主宗悟一乘善入實相。欲導常情故總斥之。
何者 不許見遷必有教理。故總徴之。
放光云。法無去來無動轉者 即彼經第七卷中雲。諸法不動搖故諸法亦不去亦不來等。法即緣集之物。以任持自體軌生人解。故去來動轉遷也。既云皆無不遷也。然實教了義多有此說法華云。世間相常住。
尋夫不動之作豈釋(舍也)動以求靜。必求靜于諸動。必求靜于諸動故。雖動而常靜。不釋動以求靜故。雖靜而不離動 初句舉經。但
解動靜以例去來。動即遷也。靜即不遷。豈釋下會釋。次二句明不捨事動而求靜理。然動靜多體。且約心境略示。境者真諦理性故靜。俗諦事法故動。二諦相即故云不捨。意云。要證真諦之靜不離俗動。心者實智向真故靜。權智應俗故動。二智無礙故亦不捨權動也。后四句躡前以明即靜而動。亦通心境。以不捨事動而入靜。故正靜時正動。論中正唯理事。既云求靜不捨等。故兼二智。
然則動靜未始異。而惑者不同 動靜本一迷夫見異。世間與出世殊科。依計與圓成分處。
緣(因也)使真言滯于競(諍也)辯。宗(理也)途屈於好異 真言謂了義言詮真實之教。宗途謂一乘宗途不遷之理。意云。動靜無二了義所詮。三乘之人于無二法中而見兩異。保執權淺不信無二之道。好異之心發言諍辨。因此使令了義滯而不行。宗途屈而不伸。正同圭峰大師云了義匿於龍藏。敘此為起論之由也。然四論之作皆由排異。何者。不真空明斥三家。般若論云。然異端之論紛然久矣。涅槃論云。今演論之作。寂彼廓然排方外之談。故知皆緣異見而作。
所以靜躁(動也)之極未易言也 競辨者眾好異者多。故言之難。
何者(微也)夫談真則逆俗。順俗則違真。違真故迷性而莫返(歸也)逆俗故言淡而無味 初
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
以動和靜為例來理解去和來。動就是遷變，靜就是不遷變。難道是解釋下文的會釋嗎？接下來的兩句說明不要捨棄事相的動而追求靜止的理體。然而動和靜有多重含義，這裡僅就心和境略作說明。境，指的是真諦的理性，所以是靜；俗諦的事法，所以是動。二諦相互即是，所以說不捨棄。意思是說，要證得真諦的靜，不能離開俗諦的動。心，指的是實智，趨向真理，所以是靜；權智，應和世俗，所以是動。二智沒有障礙，所以也不捨棄權智的動。後面的四句承接前面，說明即靜而動，也貫通心和境。因為不捨棄事相的動而進入靜，所以在真正靜的時候，也正是動的時候。《論》中「正」唯指理和事。既然說「求靜不捨」等，所以兼顧二智。
如此說來，動和靜從來沒有不同，只是迷惑的人看法不同。動和靜本來是一體的，迷惑的人才看到差異。世間和出世間是不同的科目，依據計度和圓成是不同的處所。
因為（緣，原因）使得真言滯留在爭辯之中，宗途屈服於愛好差異。真言指的是了義的言詮，真實的教義。宗途指的是一乘宗途，不遷變的理。意思是說，動和靜沒有二致，這是了義所詮釋的。三乘之人，在沒有二致的法中卻看到兩種差異，保持執著權巧淺薄的教義，不相信沒有二致的道理。愛好差異的心，一發言就爭論辯駁。因此使得了義滯澀而不流行，宗途屈服而不能伸張。正如圭峰大師所說，了義隱藏在龍藏之中。敘述這些是發起論述的原因。然而四論的寫作都是因為排斥異端。為什麼呢？不真空明明白地駁斥三家。般若論說，然而異端的論調紛亂很久了。《涅槃論》說，現在演論的寫作，寂靜地廓清排斥方外的談論。所以知道都是因為不同的見解而寫作。
所以靜和躁（動）的極致，不容易說清楚。爭辯的人多，愛好差異的人多，所以說起來很難。
為什麼（微，深奧）呢？談論真理就違背世俗，順應世俗就違背真理。違背真理，所以迷惑本性而不能返回（歸），違背世俗，所以言語平淡而沒有味道。最初
【English Translation】 English version:
Use movement and stillness as examples to understand going and coming. Movement is change, and stillness is non-change. Is this an explanation of the 'hui shi' (comprehensive explanation) below? The next two sentences explain not to abandon the movement of phenomena to seek the stillness of principle. However, movement and stillness have multiple meanings, and here we will briefly explain them in terms of mind and environment. 'Environment' refers to the rationality of the true reality (Paramārtha-satya), so it is stillness; the phenomenal dharma of the conventional reality (Saṃvṛti-satya), so it is movement. The two truths are mutually inclusive, so it is said not to abandon. The meaning is that to attain the stillness of the true reality, one cannot be separated from the movement of the conventional reality. 'Mind' refers to the wisdom of reality, which tends towards truth, so it is stillness; expedient wisdom, which responds to the mundane, so it is movement. The two wisdoms are unobstructed, so one does not abandon the movement of expedient wisdom either. The following four sentences continue from the previous ones, explaining that stillness is movement, which also connects mind and environment. Because one does not abandon the movement of phenomena to enter stillness, when one is truly still, one is also truly moving. In the Treatise, 'true' refers only to principle and phenomena. Since it says 'seeking stillness without abandoning,' it also includes the two wisdoms.
Therefore, movement and stillness have never been different, but those who are deluded see them as different. Movement and stillness are originally one, but those who are deluded see differences. The mundane and the supramundane are different categories, and relying on calculation and perfect accomplishment are different places.
Because (緣, yuán, cause) true words are滯 (zhì, stagnated) in contention (諍, zhēng, dispute), and the principles (宗, zōng, doctrine) are屈 (qū, bent) in the love of difference. 'True words' refers to the words of definitive meaning, the true teachings. 'Principles' refers to the one vehicle (Ekayana) doctrine, the unchanging principle. The meaning is that movement and stillness are not different, which is what the definitive meaning explains. People of the three vehicles see two differences in the non-dual dharma, maintaining attachment to expedient and shallow teachings, and not believing in the non-dual path. The mind that loves difference speaks out in contention and dispute. Therefore, the definitive meaning is stagnated and does not circulate, and the principles are bent and cannot be extended. Just as Master Guifeng said, the definitive meaning is hidden in the Dragon Treasury. Narrating these is the reason for initiating the treatise. However, the writing of the four treatises is all because of rejecting heterodoxy. Why? The 'Non-Emptiness Treatise' clearly refutes the three schools. The 'Prajna Treatise' says, 'However, the theories of heterodoxy have been in turmoil for a long time.' The 'Nirvana Treatise' says, 'Now the writing of the treatise is to quietly clarify and reject the talk outside the square.' So it is known that they are all written because of different views.
Therefore, the extremes of stillness and agitation (movement) are not easy to express. There are many who contend, and many who love difference, so it is difficult to speak.
Why (微, wēi, subtle)? Talking about truth goes against the mundane, and conforming to the mundane goes against truth. Going against truth, one is deluded about one's nature and cannot return (歸, guī, return); going against the mundane, one's words are bland and tasteless. Initially
二句明逆順兩違。體乎不二名真。執乎兩異名俗若順法談一。則逆乎常情好異之徒。此則法不應根也。若順俗談異。則又違真一之法此則根不達法也。后四句逆順皆失。謂莫二之真即性也。今既順俗談異常情。迷此真性不能歸於寶所。若談真則俗情不入。反謂言淡無味。老氏云。道之出口淡乎其無味。
緣使中人未分于存亡。下士撫(擊也)掌而弗(不也)顧 承前談真而來。意云。雖逆俗招無味之謗。只可談真使人返悟。不可順俗而令不入。上士聞真勤而行之。中士聞真若存若亡。疑信相半。下士聞真則拍手大笑。反為淡泊不復顧慕。文出老書。故順而釋之。
近而不可知者。其唯物性乎 初句事俗流動名近。即真不遷難知。后句屬體。
然不能自已(止也)聊復寄真心於動靜之際。豈曰必然。試論之曰 然者。猶云雖然。中下疑笑。要使真言不滯。宗途大明常情悟入。欲罷不能。略復依言寄真一之心於動靜之際。未敢必是。但試為論之謙也。
道行雲。諸法本無所從來。去亦無所至。中觀論云。觀方知彼去。去者不至方 雙引經論立不遷之宗也。道行引其正文。卷當第十。諸法即物也。本謂根本亦元也。緣集而來來何所從。緣離而去去何所至。如善財問慈氏云。此樓閣何處去耶。答曰。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 這兩句說明了順和逆兩種情況都違背了真理。體悟到不二之理，就叫做『真』。執著於二元對立的差異，就叫做『俗』。如果順應佛法談論『一』（不二），那麼就違背了世俗常情中人們喜好差異的心理。這就是佛法不能應合衆生的根器。如果順應世俗談論差異，那麼又違背了真一之法，這就是眾生的根器不能通達佛法。後面的四句說明順和逆都失去了真理。所謂『莫二之真』就是自性。現在既然順應世俗，談論與常情不同的事物，就會迷惑于真性，不能迴歸到寶所（涅槃）。如果談論真理，那麼世俗的情感就不能進入，反而會說言語平淡無味。《老子》說：『道之出口，淡乎其無味。』 承接前面談論真理而來，意思是說，即使違背世俗招來平淡無味的批評，也只能談論真理使人覺悟。不能順應世俗而使人不能進入真理。上士聽聞真理後勤奮地修行，中士聽聞真理後半信半疑，下士聽聞真理后則拍手大笑，反而認為平淡無味而不願顧念。《老子》中的文字，所以順著文意來解釋。 『近而不可知者，其唯物性乎』，第一句說的是世俗事物流動變化，所以叫做『近』。真理不遷不變，難以知曉。后一句是本體。 『然』，相當於『雖然』。中等和下等根器的人懷疑嘲笑，要使真理的言語不滯塞，宗門的道路大放光明，使常情覺悟而進入真理。想要停止卻不能停止，略微依著言語，將真一之心寄託于動靜之間，不敢肯定一定正確，只是試著論述一下，這是謙虛的說法。 《道行般若經》說：『諸法本無所從來，去亦無所至。』《中觀論》說：『觀方知彼去，去者不至方。』這是雙重引用經論來確立不遷的宗旨。《道行般若經》引用的是正文，在第十卷。諸法就是萬物。『本』是根本，也是最初。因為因緣聚合而來，來從何處？因緣離散而去，去往何處？如同善財童子問彌勒菩薩說：『此樓閣何處去耶？』回答說：
【English Translation】 English version: These two sentences explain that both following and opposing violate the truth. Realizing the non-dual principle is called 'Truth'. Clinging to dualistic differences is called 'Worldly'. If one speaks of 'Oneness' (non-duality) in accordance with the Dharma, then it goes against the common worldly sentiment of people who like differences. This is because the Dharma cannot correspond to the faculties of sentient beings. If one speaks of differences in accordance with worldly customs, then it violates the Dharma of True Oneness. This is because the faculties of sentient beings cannot understand the Dharma. The following four sentences explain that both following and opposing lose the truth. The so-called 'Truth of Non-duality' is self-nature. Now, since one follows worldly customs and speaks of things that are different from common sentiments, one will be deluded by the true nature and unable to return to the treasure land (Nirvana). If one speaks of the truth, then worldly emotions cannot enter, and instead, they will say that the words are plain and tasteless. Lao Tzu said: 'The Tao (道) that comes out of the mouth is bland and without flavor.' Continuing from the previous discussion of truth, the meaning is that even if one violates worldly customs and invites criticism of being plain and tasteless, one can only speak of the truth to awaken people. One cannot follow worldly customs and prevent people from entering the truth. Superior individuals diligently practice after hearing the truth, intermediate individuals are half-believing and half-doubting after hearing the truth, and inferior individuals clap their hands and laugh loudly after hearing the truth, instead thinking it is plain and tasteless and unwilling to consider it. The text is from Lao Tzu, so it is explained according to the meaning of the text. 'What is near and cannot be known, is it not the nature of things?' The first sentence refers to the worldly things that flow and change, so it is called 'near'. The truth does not move or change, so it is difficult to know. The latter sentence refers to the substance. 'However', is equivalent to 'although'. People of intermediate and inferior faculties doubt and laugh, wanting to make the words of truth not stagnant, the path of the sect shine brightly, and make common sentiments awaken and enter the truth. Wanting to stop but being unable to stop, slightly relying on words, entrusting the heart of True Oneness to the midst of movement and stillness, not daring to be certain that it is correct, but just trying to discuss it, this is a humble statement. The Daoxing Borejing (道行般若經) says: 'All dharmas originally come from nowhere and go nowhere.' The Madhyamaka-karika (中觀論) says: 'Observing the direction, one knows that it is going, but the one who goes does not reach the direction.' This is a double quotation of scriptures and treatises to establish the principle of non-movement. The Daoxing Borejing quotes the original text, in the tenth volume. All dharmas are all things. 'Originally' is the root, also the beginning. Because causes and conditions gather and come, where does it come from? Because causes and conditions disperse and go, where does it go? It is like when Sudhana (善財童子) asked Maitreya Bodhisattva (慈氏菩薩): 'Where does this pavilion go?' The answer was:
來處去也。解云。欲明其去先知其來。來不見源去亦何所。譬如寒暑相代。寒自何來暑於何去。是謂諸法如幻如化。當處出生隨處滅盡。中觀下但義引彼破去來品。卷當第二。然論極深細。今略示之。方謂去處彼即去者。論長行雲。去法去者去處。是法皆相因待不得言定有定無。是故決定知三法虛妄空無所有。但有假名如幻如化。此論之意隨俗故知彼去。順真故不至方。
斯皆即動而求靜。以知物不遷明矣 經論皆爾。于理何惑。釋動求靜三乘之見也。
夫人之所謂動者。以昔物不至今。故曰動而非靜。我之所謂靜者。亦以昔物不至今。故曰靜而非動。動而非靜以其不來。靜而非動以其不去 初三句常情倒見。后動而下二句出意。初句牒執。以昔物下出所以。以見物遷至昔唯去不來。故云遷也。次三句舉悟。后靜而下二句出意。初句舉悟。亦以下出所以。昔物不至今今物不去昔。有何動耶。今昔相待其相本空。物在其中無去無來。
然則所造(詣也)未嘗異。所見未嘗(曾也)同。逆之所謂塞順之所謂通 同見昔物不至今。而有遷不遷之異。后二句中吳凈源法師云。惑者任情逆性而塞。悟者任智順物而通。
茍得其道復何滯哉 凈源法師云。若悟不遷之道。塞自去矣已上略明大旨已顯。下又
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 來處去也。解釋說：想要明白『去』，首先要知道『來』。如果『來』找不到源頭，那麼『去』又在哪裡呢？比如寒冷和暑熱相互交替，寒冷從哪裡來？暑熱又到哪裡去？這就是所謂的諸法如幻如化，在當下出生，又在當下滅盡。《中觀論》的下部只是引用它來破斥『去來品』，內容在第二卷。然而，該論非常深奧細緻，現在稍微展示一下。所謂『去處』，就是『去者』所前往的地方。論中的長行文說：『去法』、『去者』、『去處』，這三者都是相互依存的，不能說它們是絕對存在或絕對不存在。因此，可以確定地知道這三種法是虛妄空無所有的，只有假名，如幻如化。這篇論的意義是，隨順世俗的觀點，所以知道『去』；順應真諦的觀點，所以不執著于到達某個地方。
這些都是在動態中尋求靜態，從而明白事物並非遷變的道理。經書和論典都是這樣說的，對於這個道理有什麼疑惑呢？解釋『動中求靜』是三乘的見解。
人們所說的『動』，是因為過去的物體不會來到現在，所以說是『動』而不是『靜』。我所說的『靜』，也是因為過去的物體不會來到現在，所以說是『靜』而不是『動』。說是『動』而不是『靜』，是因為它不來；說是『靜』而不是『動』，是因為它不去。最初的三句是常人的顛倒見解。後面的『動而下』兩句是作者的觀點。第一句是揭示執著，『以昔物下』是說明原因，因為看到事物遷變，認為過去的事物只是離去而不來，所以說是遷變。接下來的三句是揭示覺悟。後面的『靜而下』兩句是作者的觀點。第一句是揭示覺悟，『亦以下』是說明原因。過去的物體不會來到現在，現在的物體不會回到過去，有什麼動呢？現在和過去是相互依存的，它們的自性本來就是空。物體在其中，沒有離去，也沒有到來。
如此說來，所造作的事物未曾改變，所見到的事物也未曾相同。違背它就被認為是阻塞，順應它就被認為是通達。』同樣是看到過去的事物不會來到現在，卻有遷變和不遷變的差異。後面的兩句，中吳凈源法師說：『迷惑的人放縱情感，違背本性，所以阻塞；覺悟的人運用智慧，順應事物，所以通達。』
如果領悟了這個道理，又有什麼可以滯留的呢？』凈源法師說：『如果領悟了不遷變的道理，阻塞自然就消失了。』以上簡略地闡明了大意，已經很明顯了。下面又
【English Translation】 English version 『Coming and going.』 Explanation: To understand 『going,』 one must first know 『coming.』 If the source of 『coming』 cannot be found, then where does 『going』 lead? For example, cold and heat alternate; where does cold come from, and where does heat go? This is what is meant by all dharmas being like illusions and transformations, born in the present moment and extinguished in the present moment. The lower part of the Madhyamaka (Treatise on the Middle Way) merely cites this to refute the chapter on 『Coming and Going,』 which is in the second volume. However, the treatise is extremely profound and subtle; now, I will briefly show it. The so-called 『place of going』 is where the 『goer』 goes. The prose in the treatise says: 『Going-dharma,』 『goer,』 and 『place of going』 are all interdependent; one cannot say that they are absolutely existent or absolutely non-existent. Therefore, one can know for certain that these three dharmas are illusory and empty, having only provisional names, like illusions and transformations. The meaning of this treatise is that, following conventional views, one knows 『going』; following the ultimate truth, one is not attached to arriving at a certain place.
These are all seeking stillness within movement, thereby understanding the principle that things do not change. The sutras and treatises all say this; what doubt is there about this principle? Explaining 『seeking stillness within movement』 is the view of the Three Vehicles (Triyāna).
What people call 『movement』 is because past things do not come to the present, so it is called 『movement』 rather than 『stillness.』 What I call 『stillness』 is also because past things do not come to the present, so it is called 『stillness』 rather than 『movement.』 Saying 『movement』 rather than 『stillness』 is because it does not come; saying 『stillness』 rather than 『movement』 is because it does not go. The first three sentences are the inverted views of ordinary people. The following two sentences, 『movement and below,』 express the author's view. The first sentence reveals attachment; 『because past things below』 explains the reason, because seeing things change, believing that past things only depart and do not come, so it is called change. The next three sentences reveal enlightenment. The following two sentences, 『stillness and below,』 express the author's view. The first sentence reveals enlightenment; 『also below』 explains the reason. Past things do not come to the present, and present things do not return to the past; what movement is there? The present and the past are interdependent, and their nature is originally empty. Things are within it, without going or coming.
Thus, what is created has never changed, and what is seen has never been the same. Opposing it is considered obstruction, and conforming to it is considered understanding.』 Seeing that past things do not come to the present, there are differences between change and non-change. In the following two sentences, Dharma Master Jingyuan of Zhongwu said: 『Confused people indulge their emotions, go against their nature, and are therefore obstructed; enlightened people use their wisdom, conform to things, and are therefore understanding.』
If one understands this principle, what can remain to be obstructed?』 Dharma Master Jingyuan said: 『If one understands the principle of non-change, obstruction will naturally disappear.』 The above briefly explains the main idea, which is already clear. Below, again
廣辨。
傷夫人情之惑也久矣 無始無明有來至今。論主悲傷迷而弗悟。
目對真而莫覺。既知往物而不來。而謂今物而可往。往物既不來。今物何所往 初句泛責真謂不遷也。賢首大師云。實際居於目前翻成名相之境。次二句正責不覺之相。知其昔不來。卻計今可往。迷也。后二句就示不遷。既知昔物不來。便可悟其今物不往。
何則 徴也。
求(索也)向(昔也)物于向。于向未嘗無責(求也)向物於今。於今未嘗有。於今未嘗有。以明物不來。于向未嘗無。故知物不去 以古望今也。初四句中意云。就昔以求昔日之物。昔日元有此物。如昔有堯舜今則無之。后四句躡前成立不遷。此中今古通目三世能遷之時。物者。所遷之物。雖舉能遷。意在所遷故云物不來等。
復(反也)而求今今亦不往 以今望古不遷亦然。但互改向今及來字可。故論但云今亦不往。
是謂昔物自在。昔不從今以至昔。今物自在今不從昔以至今 釋成不遷也。論旨以今昔相待來去相形。緣體非真諸相何立。常情為相所轉。見有遷流。悟士了虛當相寂滅。何有今昔之動來去之遷。據此雖唸唸謝滅。亦唸唸不遷也。故大論第五云。菩薩知諸法不生不滅其性皆空。予昔讀此反覆不入。及讀永明大師宗鏡錄
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 廣辨。
傷感世人被事物表象迷惑太久了，從無始的無明（avidyā）以來直到現在。作者悲傷世人迷惑而不覺悟。
眼睛面對真理卻不能覺察。既然知道過去的事物不會再來，卻認為現在的事物可以離去。過去的事物既然不會再來，現在的事物又能往哪裡去呢？第一句總責，說真理是不變的。賢首大師說，實際理體就在眼前，反而變成了名相概念的境界。第二、三句正是責備不能覺察的表象。知道過去的事物不會再來，卻盤算著現在的事物可以離去，真是迷惑啊。最後兩句就此揭示事物不遷的道理。既然知道過去的事物不會再來，就可以領悟到今天的事物不會離去。
為什麼這樣說呢？這是設問。
在過去尋找過去的事物，在過去未曾沒有；在現在尋找過去的事物，在現在未曾有。在現在未曾有，以此說明事物不會到來；在過去未曾沒有，所以知道事物不會離去。這是用過去來衡量現在。前四句的意思是說，在過去尋找過去的事物，過去本來就有這個事物，比如過去有堯舜，現在就沒有了。后四句承接前面成立事物不遷的觀點。這裡今古可以通指三世遷流的時間，事物指所遷流的事物。雖然舉出能遷流的時間，意在所遷流的事物，所以說事物不來等等。
反過來尋找現在，現在也不會離去。用現在來衡量過去，事物不遷也是這樣。只要互相改變過去、現在以及來去的字眼就可以了。所以論中只說現在也不會離去。
這就是說過去的事物自在，過去不從現在而到過去；現在的事物自在，現在不從過去而到現在。解釋成立事物不遷的道理。本論的宗旨是用今昔相對、來去相形，因為本體不是真實的，各種表象又如何成立呢？常人的情識被表象所轉移，看到有遷流變化。覺悟的人明白虛幻的本質，當下了知表象寂滅，哪裡還有今昔的變動、來去的遷流呢？根據這個道理，即使唸唸謝滅，也是念念不遷的。所以《大智度論》第五卷說，菩薩知道諸法不生不滅，其自性皆空。我過去讀到這裡，反覆思索也不能領悟，等到讀了永明大師的《宗鏡錄》才明白。
【English Translation】 English version Profound Discernment.
It is lamentable that people have been deluded by the illusions of phenomena for so long, from beginningless ignorance (avidyā) until now. The author grieves that people are confused and do not awaken.
Their eyes face the truth, yet they do not perceive it. Since they know that past things do not return, they assume that present things can depart. Since past things do not return, where can present things go? The first sentence is a general rebuke, saying that truth is unchanging. Master Xianshou said, 'The actual reality dwells right before our eyes, yet it is transformed into a realm of conceptual constructs.' The next two sentences precisely criticize the aspect of non-awareness. Knowing that past things do not come, they still calculate that present things can go, which is delusion. The last two sentences reveal the principle of non-movement. Since we know that past things do not return, we can realize that present things do not depart.
Why is this so? This is a question.
Seeking (索也) past (向昔也) things in the past, in the past they were never absent (責也); seeking past things in the present, in the present they are never present. In the present they are never present, thus illustrating that things do not come; in the past they were never absent, therefore we know that things do not go. This is using the past to measure the present. The meaning of the first four sentences is that seeking past things in the past, the past originally had these things, such as Yao and Shun in the past, but not now. The last four sentences build upon the previous ones to establish the view of non-movement. Here, past and present can generally refer to the time of the three periods of existence, and 'things' refer to the things that move. Although the moving time is mentioned, the intention is on the things that are moved, so it is said that things do not come, etc.
Conversely (反也) seeking the present, the present also does not go. Using the present to measure the past, the non-movement of things is also the same. Just mutually change the words 'past,' 'present,' and 'coming' and 'going' will do. Therefore, the treatise only says that the present also does not go.
This is to say that past things are self-existent; the past does not come from the present to the past. Present things are self-existent; the present does not come from the past to the present. This explains and establishes the principle of non-movement. The purpose of this treatise is to use the relativity of past and present, and the mutual shaping of coming and going, because the essence is not real, how can various phenomena be established? Ordinary people's emotions are transferred by phenomena, seeing that there is movement and change. Awakened people understand the essence of illusion, immediately knowing that phenomena are extinguished, where is there the movement of past and present, the change of coming and going? According to this principle, even if thoughts are extinguished moment by moment, they are also not moving moment by moment. Therefore, the fifth volume of the Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra says, 'Bodhisattvas know that all dharmas are neither born nor extinguished, their nature is empty.' I used to read this and repeatedly think about it but could not understand it, until I read Master Yongming's Zong Jing Lu (Record of the Source Mirror) did I understand.
至釋此論疑滯頓消。故知論旨深隱。不可隨文作解。
故仲尼曰。回也見新。交臂非故(舊也)此文小變南華之文。彼云。仲尼謂顏回曰。吾終身與汝交一臂而失之。可不哀與。交臂二說。一云。少選也。猶言掉臂之間已失矣。一云。臂相執也。孔顏交臂相執皆令勿遷。然已遷去豈能留之。故郭象解云。夫變化不可執而留也。論意變化密移新新非舊。既唯見新新不至故。豈有遷耶。
如此則物不相往來明矣。既無往反之微眹。有何物而可動乎 通結上文。初一句斷定不遷。后二句結成本義。尚無微眹之動。況有大者。
然則旋嵐偃(仆也)岳而常靜。江河競注而不流。野馬瓢鼓(動也)而不動。日月曆(經也)天而不周 連引四事。前三所遷之物。后一能遷之時。亦通於物。皆流動中至大者至速者。而云常靜等皆不遷爾。旋嵐大風之名。此風起時偃妙高猶如腐草江河易見。野馬者。南華云。野馬塵埃也。或云。白駒遊氣。亦運動中駛埃者。日月于晝夜中週四天下。此皆常靜不流不動。以妄見非真緣生相假。茍達兩虛萬物頓寂也。
復何怪哉 情計之流執妄為實。聞四不遷良可怪誕。達觀體物至動不動亦常理也。將何怪異。上明不遷文旨已備。此下約教會違。會有內外。如文。
噫聖人
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：因此，解釋這個理論的疑惑和停滯就立刻消除了。所以知道這個理論的宗旨深奧隱秘，不可以按照字面意思來解釋。 所以孔子說：『顏回（孔子弟子）也能發現新的東西，（即使是）短暫的接觸也不是舊的。』這句話稍微改變了《南華經》（即《莊子》）的說法。《南華經》說：『孔子對顏回說：我終身與你短暫地接觸一次就失去了，能不悲哀嗎？』關於『交臂』有兩種說法，一種說法是：短暫的時間。就像說轉動一下手臂的功夫就已經失去了。另一種說法是：手臂互相執持。孔子和顏回手臂互相執持，都希望不要離去，然而已經離去了，怎麼能留住呢？』所以郭象解釋說：『變化是不可以執持而挽留的。』這個理論的意思是變化在細微處移動，新的事物不斷產生而不是舊的。既然只是看到新的事物不斷產生，而沒有到達舊的階段，哪裡會有遷變呢？ 這樣一來，萬物不互相往來就很明顯了。既然沒有往來的一點點跡象，有什麼東西是可以移動的呢？總結上文。第一句斷定沒有遷變，后兩句總結成本來的意義。尚且沒有細微跡象的移動，何況是大的移動呢？ 既然這樣，那麼即使是迴旋的狂風吹倒山嶽也是常態的靜止，江河奔騰涌入大海也是不流動的，像野馬、塵埃一樣快速運動也是不動的，太陽和月亮經過天空也不是環繞執行。連續引用四件事。前三件是所遷變的事物，后一件是能使事物遷變的時間，也可以通用於事物。都是流動的事物中最大、最快的，卻說是常態的靜止等等，都是沒有遷變罷了。旋嵐（大風）是大風的名稱。這種風颳起來的時候，吹倒妙高山（須彌山）就像吹倒腐爛的草一樣，江河容易看到。野馬（春天原野上空浮動的霧氣）是，《南華經》說：『野馬是塵埃。』或者說：『是白色的馬在遊動』，也是運動中快速的塵埃。日月在晝夜中環繞四天下。這些都是常態的靜止、不流動、不動，因為虛妄的見解，不是真實的因緣生起假象。如果通達了空和虛，萬物立刻就寂靜了。 又有什麼奇怪的呢？用情感和計較來執著虛妄為真實，聽到『四不遷』當然會覺得奇怪荒誕。通達的觀察體會事物，達到至極的動也是不動，也是常理。又有什麼奇怪的呢？上面說明『不遷』的文義已經完備了，這下面是約教會違背（真理）。會有內外，就像文字一樣。 唉！聖人（覺悟的人）
【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, the doubts and stagnation in interpreting this theory are immediately dispelled. Thus, it is known that the essence of this theory is profound and hidden, and it cannot be interpreted literally. Therefore, Confucius said, 'Hui (a disciple of Confucius) can also see new things, and even a brief encounter is not old.' This statement slightly alters the saying in the Nanhua Jing (i.e., Zhuangzi). The Nanhua Jing says, 'Confucius said to Yan Hui, 'I briefly encountered you once in my life and lost you; how can I not be sad?'' Regarding '交臂 (jiāo bì, brief encounter),' there are two interpretations. One interpretation is: a short period of time. It's like saying that in the time it takes to turn one's arm, it has already been lost. Another interpretation is: arms holding each other. Confucius and Yan Hui held each other's arms, both hoping not to leave, but since they have already left, how can they be retained?' Therefore, Guo Xiang explained, 'Change cannot be held and retained.' The meaning of this theory is that change moves subtly, and new things are constantly produced instead of old ones. Since only the constant production of new things is seen, and the stage of oldness is not reached, where would there be change? In this way, it is clear that all things do not come and go to each other. Since there is not the slightest sign of coming and going, what thing can be moved? Concluding the above text. The first sentence affirms no change, and the latter two sentences conclude the original meaning. There is not even a slight sign of movement, let alone a large movement? Since this is the case, then even if a swirling gale overturns mountains, it is still constant stillness; even if rivers rush into the sea, they are not flowing; even if wild horses and dust move quickly, they are not moving; even if the sun and moon traverse the sky, they are not orbiting. Continuously citing four things. The first three are the things that change, and the last one is the time that causes things to change, which can also apply to things. They are all the largest and fastest of moving things, but it is said that they are constant stillness, etc., and that they are simply not changing. 旋嵐 (xuán lán, swirling gale) is the name of a great wind. When this wind rises, it overturns Mount Miaogao (Mount Sumeru) as easily as overturning rotten grass; rivers are easy to see. 野馬 (yě mǎ, wild horses) is, as the Nanhua Jing says, 'Wild horses are dust.' Or it is said, 'It is a white horse moving,' which is also fast-moving dust. The sun and moon orbit the four corners of the world during the day and night. These are all constant stillness, non-flowing, and non-moving, because of false views, not true causes and conditions giving rise to false appearances. If one understands emptiness and voidness, all things will immediately become still. What is so strange about that? Using emotions and calculations to cling to falsehood as reality, hearing 'four non-movements' will of course seem strange and absurd. A thorough observation and understanding of things reaches the ultimate movement, which is also non-movement, which is also common sense. What is so strange about that? The above explanation of the meaning of 'non-movement' is complete; the following is about the teaching that goes against (the truth). There will be internal and external, just like the text. Alas! The sage (enlightened being)
有言曰。人命逝(往也)速速于川流 潛妨也。噫心不平而恨聲也。梵網云。人命無常過於山水。諸經多有。意云。若物不遷豈非違此說耶。
是以聲聞悟非(無也)常以成道。緣覺覺緣離以即真。茍萬動而非化(遷也)豈尋化以階(進也)道 初二句舉行人。聲謂聲教聞教悟理。修無常等行證成四果。緣謂緣起。觀緣而覺。離緣起之有為。進五果之妙道。后二句辯違。若云不遷。豈彼二人稟無常之教。修無常之行而得道果耶。
復尋聖言微隱難測。若動而靜似去而留 通前違妨也。復謂研復。聖言即前無常教也。微隱難測者。以言權旨實故。涅槃名為密語。大乘智臣善識密意。意謂雖談無常亦密顯真常。不可守言一向作無常解也。以二法相待有此。定有彼故。若動下出難測所以。若說即無常之動是真常之靜。似說一人即去而元不去也。難測在此。
可以神會難以事求 此理幽微。只可神而明之妙識佛意。不必隨識依言定旨。事謂情識及言教也。楞伽經中大慧示疑。佛亦會釋。故法四依中。但令依義不依文依智不依識也。生公反教而談理千古希聲。肇公賤事而貴神百世準式。然唯上智中下不可。
是以言去不必去。閑(防也)人之常想。稱住不必住。釋(解也)人之所謂(執也)往耳。豈曰
去而可遣(遷也)住而可留耶 既貴神賤事。只可舍文會旨。經說無常。不必說物遷去。但是防凡夫之人著常之想。經說常住。未必說物不遷。但解二乘計無常爾。此之二說本皆破倒。倒情既遣萬物非遷。非不遷也。涅槃初分大有此說。善哉論主。實曰智臣矣后二句正明舍文。豈可聞說無常。便謂萬物遷去。聞說常住便計萬化常留。
故成具云。菩薩處計常之中而演非常之教。故摩訶衍論云。諸法不動無去來處 雙引經論各證一事。引成具經中既云。菩薩為破眾生常計而演無常之教。證前閑人之常想。智度論中諸法不動。以證釋人之所謂往。皆對治悉檀非第一義。
斯皆導達(悟也)群方(類也)兩言一會。豈曰文殊而乖其致(旨也)哉 若經若論。皆是引悟眾生之典。而經說去論言住。兩言在文實異。然經本破常物不必去。論本顯真物不必留。所以云一會。在旨不乖。
是以言常而不住稱去而不遷。不遷故雖往而常靜。不住故雖靜而常往。雖靜而常往故往而弗遷。雖往而常靜故靜而弗留矣 初二句中經論隨計破著。說遷不遷物不必然也。次四句躡前。已明遷而不遷不遷而遷。后四句復躡前。已明遷即不遷不遷即遷。故非重也。所以不會二乘者。以二乘但稟無常之教而修。故唯會教人可悟也。
{ "translations": [ "現代漢語譯本：\n\n『去』是否意味著可以遣散（遷離）？『住』是否意味著可以停留？既然重視精神而輕視事物，就應該捨棄文字，領會旨意。《經》中說『無常』，不必解釋為萬物遷逝；只是爲了防止凡夫執著于常的觀念。《經》中說『常住』，未必是指萬物不遷變；只是爲了開解二乘之人執著于無常的觀念。這兩種說法，其根本目的都是爲了破除顛倒的執著。顛倒的執著一旦消除，萬物就既非遷逝，也非不遷逝。《涅槃經》的最初部分對此有大量的闡述。善哉，論主！您真是智慧之臣啊！』後面的兩句正是說明要捨棄文字。難道可以聽到說『無常』，就認為萬物遷逝；聽到說『常住』，就認為萬物永遠停留嗎？\n\n所以《成具光明定經》說：『菩薩處於計常的眾生之中，而宣說非常的教義。』所以《摩訶衍論》說：『諸法不動，沒有去處，也沒有來處。』這裡分別引用經和論來證明一件事。《成具光明定經》中說，菩薩爲了破除眾生執著于常的觀念，而宣說無常的教義，這是爲了對治前面所說的凡夫的常想。《智度論》中說諸法不動，是爲了證明解釋者所說的『往』，這些都是對治悉檀，並非第一義諦。\n\n這些都是爲了引導開悟各種根器的眾生，兩種說法最終會歸於一致。難道文殊菩薩的智慧會違背佛法的宗旨嗎？無論是經還是論，都是引導眾生開悟的經典。經中說『去』，論中說『住』，兩種說法在文字上確實不同。然而，經的本意是破除常的觀念，並非一定指萬物遷逝；論的本意是顯現真如，並非一定指萬物停留。所以說最終會歸於一致，在宗旨上沒有違背。\n\n因此，說『常』卻不住留，稱『去』卻不遷逝。不遷逝，所以雖然往來卻常常寂靜；不住留，所以雖然寂靜卻常常往來。雖然寂靜卻常常往來，所以往來而不遷逝；雖然往來卻常常寂靜，所以寂靜而不停留。』最初兩句說明，經和論是隨著眾生的執著而破除執著，說遷逝或不遷逝，萬物並非必然如此。接下來的四句承接前面，已經闡明了遷逝即不遷逝，不遷逝即遷逝。後面的四句又承接前面，已經闡明了遷逝即是不遷逝，不遷逝即是遷逝，所以不是重複。之所以不能使二乘之人領會，是因為二乘之人只是接受無常的教義而修行，所以只能使接受教義的人領悟。" , "english_translations": [ "English version:\n\n'Going' does it mean it can be dismissed (moved away)? 'Staying' does it mean it can be retained? Since valuing the spirit and belittling matters, one should abandon the words and comprehend the meaning. The 'Sutra' says 'impermanence (anitya)', it is not necessary to interpret it as all things passing away; it is only to prevent ordinary people from clinging to the idea of permanence (nitya). The 'Sutra' says 'permanently abiding (nityasthayi)', it does not necessarily mean that all things do not change; it is only to enlighten those of the Two Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna) who cling to the idea of impermanence. These two statements, their fundamental purpose is to eliminate inverted attachments. Once inverted attachments are eliminated, all things are neither passing away nor not passing away. The initial part of the 'Nirvana Sutra (Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra)' has a lot of elaboration on this. Well done, commentator! You are truly a wise minister!' The following two sentences precisely explain the need to abandon the words. How can one, upon hearing 'impermanence', think that all things are passing away; upon hearing 'permanently abiding', think that all things are eternally staying?\n\nTherefore, the 'Sutra on Achieving Light Samadhi (Sarvārthasiddha)' says: 'The Bodhisattva (bodhisattva) dwells among beings who cling to permanence, and expounds the teaching of impermanence.' Therefore, the 'Mahayana Treatise (Mahāyāna-samgraha)' says: 'All dharmas (dharma) are unmoving, there is no place to go, and no place to come.' Here, both sutras and treatises are cited to prove one thing. The 'Sutra on Achieving Light Samadhi' says that the Bodhisattva, in order to eliminate beings' clinging to the idea of permanence, expounds the teaching of impermanence, which is to counter the aforementioned ordinary people's thought of permanence. The 'Great Perfection of Wisdom Treatise (Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra)' says that all dharmas are unmoving, which is to prove the interpreter's so-called 'going'; these are all therapeutic approaches (pratipaksa-siddhanta), not the ultimate truth (paramārtha-satya).\n\nThese are all to guide and enlighten beings of various capacities, and the two statements will eventually converge into one. How could the wisdom of Manjushri (Mañjuśrī) violate the essence of the Buddha's teachings? Whether it is a sutra or a treatise, they are all scriptures that guide beings to enlightenment. The sutra says 'going', and the treatise says 'staying'; the two statements are indeed different in words. However, the sutra's intention is to eliminate the idea of permanence, not necessarily referring to all things passing away; the treatise's intention is to reveal the true nature, not necessarily referring to all things staying. Therefore, it is said that they will eventually converge into one, and there is no violation in the essence.\n\nTherefore, saying 'permanent' yet not staying, calling 'going' yet not passing away. Not passing away, so although going and coming, it is always still; not staying, so although still, it is always going and coming. Although still, it is always going and coming, so going and coming without passing away; although going and coming, it is always still, so still without staying.' The initial two sentences explain that the sutras and treatises eliminate attachments according to beings' clinging, and whether saying passing away or not passing away, all things are not necessarily so. The following four sentences connect to the previous, already clarifying that passing away is not passing away, and not passing away is passing away. The following four sentences again connect to the previous, already clarifying that passing away is not passing away, and not passing away is passing away, so it is not repetition. The reason why it cannot enable those of the Two Vehicles to comprehend is because those of the Two Vehicles only accept the teaching of impermanence and practice accordingly, so it can only enable those who accept the teaching to be enlightened." ] }
然則莊生之所以藏山。仲尼之所以臨川 此會外典之違也。太宗師略云。夫藏舟于壑藏山于澤。謂之固矣。然而夜半有力者負之而走。昧者不知。若直解者。如人藏山于深澤以謂牢固。力大者得之於夜半中揹負而趁。彼藏山者不覺不知。此寓言也。以譬造化之力遷負周密。雖天地之大萬物之廣。未嘗不負之而走也。夜半以喻冥理也。古人云。變化之道挾日月而行。負天地而走。此亦正同四梵志藏身山海時至皆化。仲尼下論語文。孔子臨于川上嘆曰。逝者如斯夫。不捨晝夜。意云。新新之化往者過而來者續。無一息之停。如斯。指水也。二典皆言物遷。如何會通。
斯皆感往者之難留。豈曰排(遣也)今而可往 二典皆感往物難留至今。非說今物排去。以明即遷而不遷爾。巧攝儒道。故類會之。
是以觀聖人心者。不同人之所見得也 孔子域中之聖。莊周達觀之賢。賢聖之人所見所得人難盡之。不可隨文只作無常之解。
何者 徴也。
人則謂少壯同體百齡(年也)一質(體也)徒(虛也)知年往不覺形隨 此出凡情見淺也。但見年去。不知形亦隨變。少壯既殊百年形異。執乎一體誠為倍迷。若知少壯不互有。年年不相到隨遇隨空。何有遷耶。
是以梵志出家白首而歸。鄰人見之曰
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 那麼莊子所說的藏身於山，仲尼所說的臨水而嘆，這與佛經的教義是相違背的。《太宗師》中略有提到：『把船藏在山澗里，把山藏在沼澤里，認為這樣就很牢固了。然而半夜裡有力氣的人把它揹走了，愚昧的人卻不知道。』如果直接解釋，就像有人把山藏在深澤里，認為很牢固，力氣大的人在半夜裡把它揹走，藏山的人卻不覺得也不知道。這只是個寓言。用它來比喻造化的力量遷移揹負是多麼周密，即使是天地之大，萬物之廣，沒有不被它揹著走的。『夜半』比喻幽深的道理。古人說：『變化之道挾持著日月執行，揹負著天地而走。』這也正如同四梵志藏身於山海，時機一到都化去了一樣。仲尼下面論述語文，孔子在河邊感嘆說：『逝去的光陰像流水一樣啊，日夜不停留。』意思是說，新新之化，過去的過去了，而未來的接續而來，沒有一刻的停息。『如斯』，指的是水。這兩部經典都說了事物在遷變，如何會通呢？ 這都是感嘆過去的事物難以留住，難道是說排斥現在而可以回到過去嗎？這兩部經典都是感嘆過去的事物難以留住，並不是說把現在的事物排斥掉，以此來表明事物雖然在遷變，但其本性是不變的。巧妙地融合了儒家和道家的思想，所以把它們歸為一類。 因此，觀察聖人的心境，是不同於一般人所見所能理解的。孔子是世俗中的聖人，莊周是通達事理的賢人。賢人和聖人所見所理解的，一般人難以完全理解，不能只按照字面意思理解為無常。 什麼是『徴』呢？ 人們認為少年和壯年是同一個身體，活到一百歲也是同一個體質，只是徒勞地知道年齡在增長，卻沒有察覺形體也在隨之改變。這是凡夫俗子的淺薄見解。只看到年齡在增長，卻不知道形體也在隨之改變。少年和壯年已經不同，活到一百歲形體就更加不同了。執著于同一個身體，實在是更加迷惑。如果知道少年和壯年不是互相擁有的，每一年都不會互相到達，隨遇隨空，哪裡還有遷變呢？ 因此，梵志出家，白髮蒼蒼地回家，鄰居看到他說：
【English Translation】 English version: Then, Zhuangzi's (Zhuang Zhou, a Daoist philosopher) idea of hiding in the mountains and Confucius' (Kongzi, a philosopher and politician) lamenting by the river, are these contrary to the teachings of the Buddhist scriptures? The 'Great Teacher' (Tai Zong Shi, a chapter in the Zhuangzi) briefly mentions: 'To hide a boat in a ravine, to hide a mountain in a swamp, thinking it is secure. However, in the middle of the night, a strong person carries it away, and the ignorant do not know.' If interpreted directly, it's like someone hiding a mountain in a deep swamp, thinking it's secure, but a strong person carries it away in the middle of the night, and the one who hid the mountain doesn't realize it or know. This is just a parable. It's used to illustrate how meticulous the power of creation is in moving and carrying things; even the vastness of heaven and earth, the breadth of all things, are carried away by it. 'Midnight' is a metaphor for profound principles. The ancients said: 'The way of change carries the sun and moon in its movement, and carries heaven and earth as it goes.' This is just like the four Brahmacaris (Fan Zhi, ascetics) hiding themselves in the mountains and seas, and when the time comes, they all transform. Confucius below discusses language, Confucius sighed by the river and said: 'Passing time is like flowing water, never ceasing day and night.' The meaning is that the new replaces the old, the past passes and the future continues, without a moment's pause. 'Like this' refers to water. Both classics speak of things changing, how can they be reconciled? These are all lamenting the difficulty of retaining the past; is it saying that by rejecting the present, one can return to the past? Both classics lament the difficulty of retaining past things, not saying to reject present things, to show that although things are changing, their nature is unchanging. It skillfully integrates Confucian and Daoist thoughts, so they are classified together. Therefore, observing the mind of a sage is different from what ordinary people see and understand. Confucius is a sage in the mundane world, and Zhuang Zhou is a wise man who understands the truth. What the wise and sages see and understand is difficult for ordinary people to fully comprehend; one cannot simply interpret it as impermanence according to the literal meaning. What is 'Zheng' (徵, a sign or indication)? People think that youth and adulthood are the same body, and living to a hundred years is also the same constitution, merely knowing that age is increasing, but not realizing that the form is also changing. This is the shallow view of ordinary people. They only see age increasing, but do not know that the form is also changing. Youth and adulthood are already different, and the form is even more different when living to a hundred years. Clinging to the same body is truly more confusing. If one knows that youth and adulthood are not mutually possessed, and each year will not reach each other, meeting and emptying as one goes, where is there change? Therefore, a Brahmacari (Fan Zhi, ascetic) leaves home and returns with white hair, and the neighbor sees him and says:
。昔人尚存乎。梵志曰。吾猶昔人非昔人也。鄰人皆愕然非其言也 此以外事故類證爾。梵志解遷中不遷如孔莊。鄰人非之如凡淺。西域凈行梵志十五遊學。三十歸娶。五十入山。今言出家謂入山也。白髮復歸。鄰人以常情問之云。昔人尚在耶。見今問昔亦已誤矣。故梵志答之但似昔人。豈今之新吾是昔之故吾哉。鄰人不達隨變之理執。今白首是昔朱顏。
所謂有力者負之而趁。昧者不覺。其斯之謂歟 源云。負之而趁猶老少形變。昧者不覺猶人愕然。
是以如來因群情之所滯。則(準也)方(正也)言以辨惑。乘(憑也)莫二之真心。吐不一之殊教。乖而不可異者其唯聖言乎。故談真有不遷之稱。導俗有流動之說。雖復千途異唱。而會歸同致矣 初至聖言乎等者。通辨諸教文異旨同。故談下結成一致。眾生流滯于生死。根行樂欲種種差殊。故如來觀機演教。依準正理之言以解凡惑。依一真法界流十二分教。若小若大或權或實。八萬度門恒沙佛法故不一也。梵網云。世界無量教門亦爾。雖乃差殊其旨無異。原佛本意亦唯一事。故不可文殊令旨亦差。
而徴(索也)文者。聞不遷則謂昔物不至今。聆(聽也)流動者。而謂今物可至昔 隨聲取義之士。滯於一偏不達圓音。故再舉今昔以示之。令不泥教
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『過去的那個人還存在嗎？』梵志（婆羅門修行者）回答說：『我像是過去的那個人，但又不是過去的那個人。』鄰居們都驚訝，認為他的話不合常理。這可以用其他事情來類比證明。梵志（婆羅門修行者）解釋了遷變中不變的道理，就像孔子和莊子一樣。鄰居們否定他，就像那些平庸淺薄的人。西域有個凈行梵志（婆羅門修行者），十五歲開始遊學，三十歲回家結婚，五十歲進入山林修行。這裡說的出家，就是指進入山林。白髮蒼蒼又回來了，鄰居用常人的想法問他，說：『過去的那個人還存在嗎？』現在問過去，就已經錯了。所以梵志（婆羅門修行者）回答說，只是像過去的那個人。難道現在的新的我，還是過去的舊的我嗎？』鄰居不明白隨順變化的道理，執著于現在的白髮就是過去的紅顏。
『所以說，有力氣的人揹著東西趕路，愚昧的人卻不覺察。』說的就是這種情況吧。源注說：『揹著東西趕路，就像人衰老變化。愚昧的人不覺察，就像鄰居們感到驚訝。』
因此，如來因為眾生的思想被困住，就用符合正理的言語來辨別迷惑。憑藉著唯一真實的真心，宣說不一樣的各種教義。雖然有千萬條不同的道路，但最終都會彙集到同一個目標。』最初的『至聖言乎』等，是用來總括說明各種教義的文字不同，但旨意相同。所以用『故談下結成一致』來總結成一致。眾生被困在生死輪迴中，根性、行為、喜好種種不同，所以如來觀察眾生的根機來演說教法，依據正理的言語來解除凡夫的迷惑。依據一真法界流出十二部經，無論是小乘還是大乘，是權教還是實教，八萬法門，恒河沙數般的佛法，所以說『不一』。《梵網經》說：『世界無量，教門也一樣。』雖然有差別，但旨意沒有不同。佛的本意也只有一件事，所以不可認為文殊菩薩的旨意也有差別。
而那些咬文嚼字的人，聽到『不遷』，就認為過去的東西不會到現在；聽到『流動』，就認為現在的東西可以到過去。』這些隨聲取義的人，拘泥於一方面，不明白圓融的道理。所以再次舉出今昔的例子來開示他們，讓他們不要執著于教條。
【English Translation】 English version: 『Does the person of the past still exist?』 The Brahmana (梵志) (ascetic) replied, 『I am like the person of the past, yet not the person of the past.』 The neighbors were all astonished, considering his words illogical. This can be proven by analogy with other matters. The Brahmana (梵志) explained the principle of non-cessation within change, like Confucius and Zhuangzi. The neighbors denied him, like those who are mediocre and shallow. In the Western Regions, there was a Brahmana (梵志) practicing pure conduct who traveled for studies at fifteen, returned home to marry at thirty, and entered the mountains to cultivate at fifty. Here, 『leaving home』 refers to entering the mountains. Returning with white hair, the neighbors asked him with common sense, saying, 『Does the person of the past still exist?』 To ask about the past now is already a mistake. Therefore, the Brahmana (梵志) replied that he only resembled the person of the past. Could the new me of now be the old me of the past?』 The neighbors did not understand the principle of following change, clinging to the idea that the white hair of now is the rosy cheeks of the past.
『Therefore, it is said that the strong carry burdens and hurry on, while the ignorant do not perceive it.』 This is what it refers to. Yuan's commentary says: 『Carrying burdens and hurrying on is like the aging and changing of form. The ignorant do not perceive it, like the neighbors being astonished.』
Therefore, the Tathagata (如來) (the thus-gone one, Buddha) because the minds of sentient beings are trapped, uses words that conform to the correct principle to distinguish and resolve confusion. Relying on the one true mind, he proclaims various different teachings. Although there are thousands of different paths, they will eventually converge to the same goal.』 The initial 『至聖言乎』 (to the words of the most sacred) and so on, is to generally explain that the texts of various teachings are different, but the meaning is the same. Therefore, 『故談下結成一致』 (therefore, the following discussion concludes in unity) is used to summarize into unity. Sentient beings are trapped in the cycle of birth and death, and their natures, actions, and preferences are all different, so the Tathagata (如來) observes the faculties of sentient beings to expound the Dharma, relying on words of correct principle to resolve the confusion of ordinary people. Based on the one true Dharma Realm, the twelve divisions of the scriptures flow forth, whether it is Hinayana (小乘) (small vehicle) or Mahayana (大乘) (great vehicle), expedient teachings or real teachings, eighty-four thousand Dharma gates, countless Buddha-dharmas, hence the term 『not one』. The Brahma Net Sutra (梵網經) says: 『Worlds are immeasurable, and so are the teaching gates.』 Although there are differences, the meaning is not different. The original intention of the Buddha is also only one thing, so it should not be thought that the intention of Manjushri Bodhisattva (文殊菩薩) is also different.
And those who quibble over words, upon hearing 『non-cessation』, think that things of the past will not come to the present; upon hearing 『flowing』, think that things of the present can go to the past.』 These people who grasp meaning by following sounds are attached to one aspect and do not understand the principle of perfect harmony. Therefore, the examples of past and present are raised again to enlighten them, so that they do not cling to dogma.
。
既曰古今。而欲遷之者何也 古今不可互指。不遷已明。能分古今之異。卻欲遷之何故。
是以言往不必往。古今常存以其不動。稱去不必去。謂不從今至古。以其不來。不來故不馳騁于古今。不動故。性各住於一世 初有六句。不壞古今之相。非去非來以明不遷。然三三兩分。皆初句標。次句釋。后句出不遷所以。以古不來今知今不去古也。不來下四句結成。古今之相隨性而各住自位。皆不遷也。馳騁趁走貌。
然則群籍殊文百家異說。茍得其會豈殊文之能惑哉 初二句舉教異。群籍目聖教。百家屬師宗。后二句明文異旨同。然上所會。且約動靜常無常等會釋。以此例諸法法皆然。是故經中或說苦等四妄。彰權隱實。或說常等四真。彰實隱權。如是會通異門一道。且藥分千品愈病無殊。教海萬方悟心何異。茍封文迷旨字字瘡疣。得意忘言物物合道。自此以下唯就於時以明不遷。意謂能遷古今三世之時。尚且不遷。況所遷之物而有遷耶。
是以人之所謂住。我則言其去。人之所謂去。我則言其住。然則去住雖殊。其致一也 謂凡情偏解知住迷去知去迷住。圓見之人一法雙了。特由迷悟雲泥故。去住相反。
故經云。正言似反誰當信者。斯言有由矣 言似相反旨意常順。如前住云。
何者 徴也。
人則求古於今。謂其不住。吾則求今于古。知其不去 執遷之者求古於今。見今無古故云遷也。悟者求今于古見古無今。故今不去也。
今若至古古應有今。古若至今今應有古 文通二對。皆上句舉執。下句出違。若古今互遷亦應互有。然執者但執今去古。不執古來今。今亦云者但例說爾。
今而無古以知不來。古而無今以知不去。若古不至今今亦不至古。事(物也)各性住於一世。有何物而可去來 初四句承前互無。知不來去。若古下復躡不來不去。以成不遷。
然則四象風馳璇璣電卷。得意毫微雖速而不轉 四象即四時。奔馳之疾如風也。璇璣即北斗二星之名。今通因北斗。以繞辰而轉晝夜周天速如電卷。舉此四時晝夜該攝一切。乃遷運中最速疾者。毫微謂毫毛微細也。源云茍得不遷之意在於毫微。雖四象等亦不轉移也。源師之意如能悟毫微不遷之意。雖至遷亦不遷也。此解最正。如遠公云。一毫涉動境成此頹山勢。迷既一毫而成大。悟亦毫微而見理。此中且舉悟涯初涉尚見不遷。況大達耶。
是以如來功流萬世而常存。道通百劫而彌固(堅也) 初句利他之因。積劫化生故云萬世。次句自利之行三祇修煉。故云百劫。常存彌固。二行皆不遷也。歷萬世之
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 什麼是『徴』（zhēng，徵兆，跡象）？ 世人總是從當今去追尋古代，認為事物是變遷不住的。我卻從古代來認識當今，明白事物是不離不去的。執著於事物遷變的人，從當今追尋古代，看到當今沒有古代的事物，所以說事物是遷變的。覺悟的人從古代認識當今，看到古代沒有當今的事物，所以明白當今的事物是不離去的。 如果當今能到達古代，那麼古代就應該有當今的事物；如果古代能到達當今，那麼當今就應該有古代的事物。這兩句話是兩種對立的說法。都是上句提出執著者的觀點，下句指出與此相反的道理。如果古代和當今互相遷變，也應該互相具有對方的事物。然而執著的人只執著于當今離去而到達古代，不執著于古代來到當今。說『今亦云』，只是舉例說明罷了。 當今沒有古代的事物，由此可知事物不會到來；古代沒有當今的事物，由此可知事物不會離去。如果古代不能到達當今，那麼當今也不能到達古代。事物各自的性質都安住於一個時期，有什麼事物是可以離去和到來的呢？前四句承接前面的『互無』，從而得知事物不來不去。『若古下』這幾句，再次強調不來不去，從而成就事物不遷變的道理。 如此說來，四象（指四季）執行如風馳電掣，北斗星的轉動也快如閃電。但如果領悟到毫末細微之處的真意，即使速度再快也不會發生轉移。四象指的是四季，執行的快速就像風一樣。璇璣指的是北斗二星的名稱。現在通常借用北斗星來指代圍繞星辰轉動，晝夜週而復始的執行，其速度快如閃電。這裡用四季晝夜來概括一切，這是遷變執行中最快速的。『毫微』指的是毫毛的細微之處。源法師說，如果能領悟到不遷變的真意在於毫微之處，那麼即使是四象這樣的執行也不會發生轉移。源法師的意思是，如果能夠領悟到毫微不遷變的真意，即使到了遷變的時候也不會遷變。這種解釋最為正確。如同慧遠法師所說：『一毫涉動境，成此頹山勢。』迷惑於一毫就會造成巨大的影響，領悟到毫微之處就能明白真理。這裡且說領悟的開端尚且能見到不遷變，更何況是大徹大悟呢？ 因此，如來的功德流傳萬世而長存，道行通達百劫而更加堅定。前一句說的是利他的因，經過長久的修行教化眾生，所以說是萬世。后一句說的是自利的修行，經過三大阿僧祇劫的修煉，所以說是百劫。『常存』和『彌固』，說的都是二行（利他與自利）皆不遷變。經歷萬世的...
【English Translation】 English version What is 『Zheng』 (徵, sign, indication)? People seek the ancient in the present, believing that things are impermanent and ever-changing. I, however, seek the present in the ancient, understanding that things neither depart nor arrive. Those attached to change seek the ancient in the present, seeing that the present lacks the ancient, thus claiming change. The enlightened perceive the present in the ancient, seeing that the ancient lacks the present, hence understanding that the present does not depart. If the present could reach the ancient, then the ancient should possess the present. If the ancient could reach the present, then the present should possess the ancient. These two statements present opposing views. The first part of each sentence states the view of those attached, while the second part points out the contrary truth. If the ancient and present mutually changed, they should also mutually possess each other's qualities. However, those attached only cling to the present departing to the ancient, not to the ancient coming to the present. The phrase 『present also』 is merely an illustrative example. The present lacks the ancient, from which we know that things do not arrive; the ancient lacks the present, from which we know that things do not depart. If the ancient cannot reach the present, then the present cannot reach the ancient. Each thing's nature abides in one period; what thing can depart or arrive? The first four sentences follow from the previous 『mutual lack,』 thus knowing that things neither come nor go. The sentences beginning with 『If the ancient』 reiterate non-arrival and non-departure, thereby establishing the principle of non-change. Thus, the four seasons run like the wind and lightning, and the rotation of the Big Dipper is as swift as a lightning flash. But if one grasps the true meaning in the slightest detail, even the fastest speed will not cause a shift. The four seasons refer to the four times of the year, their swiftness like the wind. 『Xuanji』 refers to the names of the two stars in the Big Dipper. Now, the Big Dipper is commonly used to refer to the rotation around the stars, the cycle of day and night, its speed as fast as lightning. Here, the four seasons and day and night encompass everything, being the fastest of all changes. 『Haowei』 refers to the slightest detail of a hair. Master Yuan said, 『If one can grasp the meaning of non-change in the slightest detail, then even the movement of the four seasons will not cause a shift.』 Master Yuan's meaning is that if one can grasp the meaning of non-change in the slightest detail, even when change occurs, one will not change. This explanation is the most correct. As Master Huiyuan said, 『A hair's breadth involved in the realm of movement creates this collapsing mountain.』 Being deluded by a hair's breadth causes great consequences, while understanding the slightest detail reveals the truth. Here, we are only talking about the beginning of understanding, which can already see non-change, let alone complete enlightenment? Therefore, the Tathagata's merit flows through myriad ages and remains constant, and the path is accessible through hundreds of kalpas and becomes even more firm. The first sentence speaks of the cause of benefiting others, cultivating and transforming beings over a long period, hence the term 『myriad ages.』 The second sentence speaks of the practice of benefiting oneself, cultivating for three great asamkhya kalpas, hence the term 『hundreds of kalpas.』 『Constant』 and 『firm』 both refer to the non-change of the two practices (benefiting others and benefiting oneself). Passing through myriad ages...
久常存。通百劫之長益固。問經說過去已滅。何故二行堅存耶答。
成山假就於始簣。修途托至於初步 此中二喻喻因不化。初句論語云。譬如為山。雖覆一簣進(云云)。簣土籠也。意以山喻果。假就者。假初一簣而山成就。始簣喻初因也。積土成山山成而初功益著。執行招果。果圓而先因尤存。后句老氏云。千里之行始於足下。托至者。仗初步而得至於千里。亦以千里喻果初步喻因也。由初至千千里至而初步不化。由行證果。果道圓而初因恒明。二喻事異義同。通喻二行。但舉初者以例中間。大疏說因果無礙云。如來毛孔現往昔因事。圓覺凈業章云。睹見調御歷恒沙劫勤苦境界(云云)。前問約泯相顯性故云已滅。論約即事同真門。故云不化。各據一理也。
果以功業不可朽故也。雖在昔而不化。不化故不遷。不遷故則湛然明矣 真流之行行行契真。果位反觀愈見不朽。若住相之行力盡而墜矣。湛謂凝湛不動之貌。余可知。
故經云。三災彌淪而行業湛然。信其言也 三災者。火水風也。三災雖酷。安能焦爛于虛空。劫海縱遙。何以遷淪於實行。彌淪者。清涼云。周遍包羅之義。謂三災雖壞一切。不能壞於因行。亦以契真故也。
何者。果不俱(兼也)因因(由也)因而果。因因而果因
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 長久常存，貫通過百劫的時間而更加堅固。問：經中說過去已經滅亡，為什麼這兩種修行仍然堅固存在呢？回答： 堆成山要憑藉最初的一筐土，修遠路要依靠最初的第一步。這其中的兩個比喻是說因不會消失。前一句出自《論語》，說：『譬如堆山，即使只倒掉一筐土，也是停止前進。』（等等）。簣是土籠。意思是，用山比喻果，憑藉最初的一筐土而山才能堆成。最初的一筐土比喻最初的因。積累泥土成為山，山成了，最初的功勞就更加顯著。執行招致果報，果報圓滿，最初的因仍然存在。后一句出自老子，說：『千里之行，始於足下。』依靠最初的一步才能到達千里。也是用千里比喻果，最初的一步比喻因。從最初到千里，千里到達了，最初的一步也不會消失。通過修行證得果位，果道圓滿，最初的因恒常明瞭。兩個比喻事情不同，意義相同，都用來比喻兩種修行。只舉最初的，是爲了以此為例推及中間。大疏說因果沒有障礙，說：『如來毛孔顯現往昔的因緣之事。』《圓覺經·凈業章》說：『看到調御歷經恒河沙劫的勤苦境界。』（等等）。前面的問題是就泯滅相而顯現性體來說的，所以說已經滅亡。這裡是就即事同真的角度來說的，所以說不會消失。各自依據一個道理。 果報因為功業不會腐朽的緣故。即使在過去也不會消失。不消失，所以不會遷變。不遷變，所以就湛然明凈了。真流的修行，修行與真理相契合。果位反觀，越發顯得不會腐朽。如果執著于相的修行，力量耗盡就會墜落了。湛，是凝湛不動的樣子。其餘可以知道了。 所以經中說：『三災瀰漫淪沒，而行業湛然不動。』相信這句話啊！三災，是火災、水災、風災。三災雖然殘酷，怎麼能燒燬虛空？劫海縱然遙遠，怎麼能遷變淪沒于真實的修行？彌淪，清涼解釋說：『周遍包羅的意思。』是說三災雖然毀壞一切，卻不能毀壞因地的修行。也是因為與真理相契合的緣故。 什麼呢？果不兼因，因由因而果，因因而果因。
【English Translation】 English version: It endures perpetually, becoming even more steadfast through hundreds of kalpas (aeons). Question: The sutra says that the past has already perished, so why do these two practices still exist firmly? Answer: Building a mountain relies on the initial basket of earth, and traversing a long journey depends on the first step. These two metaphors illustrate that the cause does not vanish. The former sentence comes from the 'Analects,' saying: 'For example, in building a mountain, even if one basket of earth is overturned, it is stopping progress.' (etc.). A 'kui' is an earth basket. The meaning is to use the mountain as a metaphor for the fruit (result), and the mountain is accomplished by relying on the initial basket of earth. The initial basket of earth is a metaphor for the initial cause. Accumulating earth forms a mountain; when the mountain is formed, the initial merit becomes even more evident. The operation invites the fruit, and when the fruit is complete, the initial cause still exists. The latter sentence comes from Lao Tzu, saying: 'A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.' Reaching a thousand miles relies on the initial step. It also uses a thousand miles as a metaphor for the fruit, and the initial step as a metaphor for the cause. From the beginning to a thousand miles, when a thousand miles are reached, the initial step does not disappear. Through practice, one attains the fruit; when the fruit of the path is complete, the initial cause is always clear. The two metaphors are different in events but the same in meaning, both used to illustrate the two practices. Only the initial one is mentioned to exemplify the middle. The Great Commentary says that cause and effect are unobstructed, saying: 'The pores of the Tathagata (Buddha) manifest the events of past causes.' The 'Perfect Enlightenment Sutra, Chapter on Pure Karma' says: 'Seeing the diligent and arduous realms of the Tiao Yu (one who tames) through countless kalpas.' (etc.). The previous question was about obliterating the appearance to reveal the essence, so it was said to have perished. This is from the perspective of the identity of events with truth, so it is said not to vanish. Each is based on a principle. The fruit is because the merit and deeds cannot decay. Even in the past, it does not vanish. Because it does not vanish, it does not change. Because it does not change, it is serenely clear. The practice of the true stream, the practice is in accordance with the truth. Looking back from the fruit position, it becomes even more evident that it will not decay. If one clings to the practice of appearance, the strength will be exhausted and one will fall. 'Zhan' means the appearance of being still and unmoving. The rest can be understood. Therefore, the sutra says: 'The three calamities (fire, water, wind) pervade and submerge, but the karma remains serenely unmoving.' Believe these words! The three calamities are fire, water, and wind. Although the three calamities are cruel, how can they burn and rot the void? Even if the kalpa sea is distant, how can it change and submerge the true practice? 'Mi lun,' Qingliang (a commentator) explains as: 'The meaning of pervading and encompassing.' It means that although the three calamities destroy everything, they cannot destroy the practice of the causal ground. It is also because it is in accordance with the truth. What is it? The fruit does not combine with the cause, the cause is due to the cause and then the fruit, the cause and then the fruit and then the cause.
不昔滅。果不俱因因不來今。不滅不來則不遷之致明矣 初句中果極至得因在應得。二位相遠故不俱也。次句果由因得故。次二句躡示不去。次二句躡示不來。后二句釋成不遷。雖舉果顯因亦即合於性空故不遷也。問前通會諸法。因亦在其中矣。何故別舉其因再明之耶。答深有所以。恐進行之人謂所修隨化勞而無功。故舉如來果身由昔因感。果在因存豈唐捐乎。如童子熟書。非不由生而至於熟。書熱之時前功尤顯。隨相之行熏引尚爾況無相之行乎。所以不辨果不遷者。因且不遷。況夫果道。是故佛果有為無為非一非異。吾今此身即是常身。
復何惑于去留。踟躕于動靜之間者哉 惑不達也。踟躕將進將退之貌。疑也。如上教理成立不遷極明。更何惑于即事之中道耶。
然則乾坤倒覆無謂不靜。洪流滔天無謂其動 無謂。戒止之辭。倒覆崩墜也。天地雖大。亦緣集之法容可傾覆。以性空故亦即清寧。千門異說不出宗意。
茍能契神于即物。斯不遠而可知矣 茍能以神妙心智。即于緣生遷化物中。而了不遷之理。物既在近理亦非遠。反顯舍物求之去理轉遠清涼云。至趣非遠。心行得之則甚深。下論云。觸事而真等。
不真空論第二 一切諸法無自性生。資緣而起。起而非真。如幻如夢當體空也。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『不昔滅。果不俱因因不來今。不滅不來則不遷之致明矣』——過去不會消滅。果（結果）不會和因（原因）同時存在，因為因不會變成現在。不滅不來，那麼不遷（不改變）的道理就明顯了。 初句中，果達到極致才得到因，因在應得的位置。二者位置相距遙遠，所以不會同時存在。次句說果由因產生。接下來的兩句承接上文，說明不去。再接下來的兩句承接上文，說明不來。最後兩句解釋成就了不遷。雖然舉果來顯示因，但也符合性空的道理，所以不遷。有人問：前面貫通了諸法，因也在其中了，為什麼還要單獨舉出因來再次說明呢？回答是：其中有很深的道理。恐怕修行的人認為所修的法隨著變化而徒勞無功，所以舉出如來的果身是由過去的因感得的。果在因存，難道會白費功夫嗎？就像童子熟練地讀書，不是從生疏到熟練的嗎？讀書熟練的時候，之前的功夫尤其明顯。隨著相的修行尚且如此，何況無相的修行呢？所以不辨別果不遷，是因為因且不遷，何況果道。因此，佛果有為無為，非一非異。我現在這個身體就是常身。 『復何惑于去留。踟躕于動靜之間者哉』——又有什麼迷惑于去留，在動靜之間猶豫不決呢？惑是不通達。踟躕是想要前進又想要後退的樣子，是疑惑。像上面的教理成立了不遷的道理，非常明顯。又有什麼迷惑于即事的中道呢？ 『然則乾坤倒覆無謂不靜。洪流滔天無謂其動』——既然這樣，那麼天地倒轉也不要說它是不靜止的，洪水滔天也不要說它是運動的。無謂，是禁止的詞語。倒覆是崩塌墜落。天地雖然廣大，也是因緣聚合的法，容許傾覆。因為性空，也就是清寧。千門萬戶不同的說法，都不能超出這個宗旨。 『茍能契神于即物。斯不遠而可知矣』——如果能夠用神妙的心智，在緣起遷變的萬物中，了達不遷的道理，事物既然在近處，道理也就不遠了。反而顯示了捨棄事物去求道理，離道理反而更遠。清涼說：最深的趣味並不遙遠，用心去實踐就能得到，非常深刻。下面的論述說：接觸事物就是真理等等。 『不真空論第二』——一切諸法沒有自性而生，依靠因緣而起。生起卻不是真實的，如幻如夢，當體就是空。
【English Translation】 English version 'Not past ceasing. Effect not together with cause, cause not coming now. Not ceasing, not coming, then the meaning of non-change is clear.' - The past will not cease. The effect (result) will not exist simultaneously with the cause (reason), because the cause will not become the present. In the first sentence, the effect reaches its extreme to obtain the cause, and the cause is in the position it should be. The two positions are far apart, so they will not exist simultaneously. The next sentence says that the effect is produced by the cause. The following two sentences continue from the previous text, explaining 'not going'. The next two sentences continue from the previous text, explaining 'not coming'. The last two sentences explain and complete the 'non-change'. Although the effect is used to show the cause, it also conforms to the principle of emptiness, so there is no change. Someone asks: The previous passage connects all dharmas, and the cause is also among them. Why do you need to single out the cause and explain it again? The answer is: There is a deep reason for this. I am afraid that those who practice will think that the dharma they practice is in vain as it changes, so I cite the Tathagata's effect body as being felt by the past cause. If the effect is present and the cause exists, will it be in vain? It's like a child reading a book proficiently, isn't it from unfamiliar to proficient? When reading is proficient, the previous effort is especially obvious. Cultivation with form is still like this, let alone cultivation without form? Therefore, not distinguishing that the effect does not change is because the cause does not change, let alone the effect path. Therefore, the Buddha's effect is conditioned and unconditioned, neither one nor different. My current body is the eternal body. 'Again, why be confused about going and staying? Hesitating between movement and stillness?' - Why be confused about going and staying, hesitating between movement and stillness? Confusion is not understanding. Hesitation is the appearance of wanting to go forward and wanting to retreat, which is doubt. Like the above teachings, the principle of non-change is established and is very clear. What confusion is there about the Middle Way in the midst of events? 'Then, heaven and earth overturned, do not say it is not still. The flood is滔天, do not say it is moving.' - Since this is the case, then even if heaven and earth are overturned, do not say that it is not still, and even if the flood is滔天, do not say that it is moving. 'Do not say' is a prohibitive word. Overturning is collapsing and falling. Although heaven and earth are vast, they are also dharmas gathered by conditions, allowing for overturning. Because of emptiness, it is also pure and peaceful. Thousands of different sayings cannot go beyond this principle. 'If one can unite the spirit with things, then it is not far and can be known.' - If one can use the wonderful mind to understand the principle of non-change in the changing things arising from conditions, since things are near, the principle is not far either. On the contrary, it shows that abandoning things to seek the principle is even further away from the principle. Qingliang said: The deepest interest is not far away, and it can be obtained by practicing with the heart, which is very profound. The following discussion says: Touching things is truth, etc. 'Non-Empty Theory Second' - All dharmas are not born of their own nature, but arise from conditions. Arising is not real, like illusion and dream, the body is empty.
故下云。待緣而有。有非真有。又云萬物非真假號久矣。皆明不真也。又云。即萬物之自虛色即是空。皆明空也。又云。寢疾有不真之談。超日有即虛之稱。雙示不真空也。緣起故有非無也。從緣故空非有也。中道之旨於斯玄會。故宗云。不有不無也。若約二諦明空有者。俗諦故非無。真諦故非有。為第一真也。下皆有文。恐繁不引。
夫至虛無生者。蓋是般若玄鑒之妙趣(向也)有物之宗極者也 初句依經標牒。次句約心顯妙。后句萬物宗體。勝義無上曰至。有無一異等俱離曰虛。無生者。謂緣集諸法非自非他。非共。亦非無因。亦非作者。無生而生非無也。雖生不生非有也。若此萬象森羅無非中道。下論云。第一真諦也。又云。觸物而一。般若下明。此勝義非識能識。但是聖智玄鑒所向之境。亦為緣有萬物所宗至極之性也。
自非聖明特(猶獨也)達。何能契神(智也)于有無之間(中也)哉 反顯也。順明云。唯聖人明智獨了可契此中道也。
是以至人通神心於無窮。所不能滯。極耳目于視聽聲色所。不能制者 果極因滿曰至。示化人流曰人。謂無上士也。初二句實智內通。神心智也。出分別故無窮理也。絕邊量故。窮所等者。謂悉覺真諦不滯于寂。后二句權智外應。目極視而色不膠。耳洞
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 因此下面說，'待緣而有'（依賴因緣而存在），'有非真有'（存在並非真實的）。又說'萬物非真假號久矣'（萬物並非真實，只是虛假的名稱存在很久了），都是說明不真實。又說，'即萬物之自虛色即是空'（萬物自身虛幻的色相即是空性），都是說明空性。又說，'寢疾有不真之談，超日有即虛之稱'（談論疾病時有不真實的說法，談論超越太陽時有即是虛幻的稱謂），雙重顯示了不真空性。因緣和合而生，所以存在並非沒有。從因緣而生，所以是空性並非存在。中道的宗旨在這裡玄妙地匯合。所以宗派說，'不有不無'（非有非無）。如果用二諦來說明空和有，那麼俗諦上並非沒有，真諦上並非存在，這是第一真諦。下面都有經文，因為內容繁多就不引用了。
所謂至虛無生，大概是般若（智慧）玄鑒（深奧的觀察）的妙趣（趨向），是有物（存在的事物）的宗極（根本）。第一句依據經文標明，第二句從心性方面顯示其妙處，后一句說明萬物的根本。勝義無上叫做'至'（最）。有無、一異等都遠離叫做'虛'（空）。'無生'是指因緣聚合的諸法，不是自己產生，不是他者產生，不是共同產生，也不是沒有原因，也不是作者產生。無生而生，所以並非沒有。雖然生起，但不生起，所以並非存在。如果這樣，萬象森羅沒有不是中道的。下面的論述說，這是第一真諦。又說，'觸物而一'（接觸事物而達到統一）。般若下面說明，這種勝義不是意識能夠認識的，只是聖智玄鑒所趨向的境界，也是因緣所生的萬物所歸宗的至極之性。
'自非聖明特達，何能契神于有無之間哉'（如果不是聖人明智特別通達，怎麼能夠使精神與有無之間的中道相契合呢）？這是反過來顯示。順著說明就是，只有聖人明智獨自了達才能契合這個中道。
'是以至人通神心於無窮，所不能滯。極耳目于視聽聲色所，不能制者'（因此，達到極高境界的人，其神通之心通達于無窮，沒有什麼能夠阻礙。耳目對於視聽聲色達到極點，沒有什麼能夠控制）這是果達到極點，因達到圓滿叫做'至'（極）。顯示教化眾生的人叫做'人'（人）。指無上士。前兩句是說實智內在通達，神心就是智慧。超出分別，所以是無窮的道理。斷絕邊際衡量，所以是窮盡。所謂悉覺真諦，不滯于寂滅。后兩句是說權智外在的應用。眼睛看到極點，但不會被色相迷惑；耳朵聽得清楚
【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, it is said below, 'Dependent origination exists' (dependent on conditions to exist), 'Existence is not true existence' (existence is not real). It is also said, 'The myriad things are not true, their false names have existed for a long time' (the myriad things are not real, just false names that have existed for a long time), all of which explain non-reality. It is also said, 'That the self-emptiness of the form of the myriad things is emptiness' (the self-emptiness of the form of the myriad things is emptiness), all of which explain emptiness. It is also said, 'In illness, there is talk of non-reality; in surpassing the sun, there is a claim of being emptiness' (when discussing illness, there are unreal statements; when discussing surpassing the sun, there is a claim of being emptiness), doubly showing the non-true emptiness. Because of dependent origination, there is existence, so it is not non-existence. From dependent origination, there is emptiness, so it is not existence. The essence of the Middle Way mysteriously converges here. Therefore, the school says, 'Neither existence nor non-existence'. If we use the two truths to explain emptiness and existence, then in the conventional truth, it is not non-existence; in the ultimate truth, it is not existence; this is the first truth. There are texts below, but I will not quote them due to their length.
The so-called 'utmost emptiness and non-arising' is probably the wonderful interest (tendency) of Prajna's (wisdom) profound insight (deep observation), and the ultimate (fundamental) principle of existing things (existing things). The first sentence is marked according to the scriptures, the second sentence shows its wonderfulness from the aspect of mind, and the last sentence explains the root of all things. 'Utmost' (supreme) means supreme righteousness. 'Emptiness' (void) means that existence and non-existence, oneness and difference, etc., are all separated. 'Non-arising' refers to the dharmas that are assembled by conditions, not arising from themselves, not arising from others, not arising together, not without cause, and not arising from a creator. Non-arising and arising, so it is not non-existence. Although arising, it does not arise, so it is not existence. If so, the myriad phenomena are all the Middle Way. The following discussion says that this is the first truth. It also says, 'Touching things and becoming one' (touching things and reaching unity). Prajna explains below that this supreme righteousness cannot be recognized by consciousness, but is only the realm to which the profound insight of holy wisdom tends, and is also the ultimate nature to which all things arising from conditions belong.
'If one is not particularly enlightened by the holy and wise, how can one unite the spirit with the Middle Way between existence and non-existence?' This is a reverse display. The straightforward explanation is that only the holy and wise can uniquely understand and unite with this Middle Way.
'Therefore, the supreme person's spiritual mind penetrates the infinite, and nothing can hinder it. The ears and eyes reach the extreme in seeing and hearing sounds and colors, and nothing can control them.' This is the result reaching the extreme, and the cause reaching perfection is called 'utmost'. Showing the person who teaches and transforms sentient beings is called 'person'. Refers to the unsurpassed one. The first two sentences say that the real wisdom internally penetrates, and the spiritual mind is wisdom. Exceeding discrimination, so it is the principle of infinity. Cutting off the boundary measurement, so it is exhaustion. The so-called fully aware of the true meaning, not clinging to silence. The last two sentences are about the external application of expedient wisdom. The eyes see to the extreme, but are not confused by form; the ears hear clearly
聽而聲弗制。則遍應諸緣不縛于有如斯不滯不制何耶。
豈不以其即萬物之自虛。故物不能累其神明者也 雙出所以也。萬物謂聲色等諸相。從緣無性故云虛也。累謂負累。神明即上神心。意云。即物之虛證之不能滯。應之不能制。抑何累于神明哉。此上依境辯心似二智殊照。既即物之虛而一源。則自真之權而無異。
是以聖人乘真心而理順。則無滯而不通。審一氣以觀化。故所遇而順適 復釋前文也。前云通神心等。云何通耶。故此云乘真心而理順等。乘憑也真心即理智也。理屬性空之理。不逆物故名順。正理于順。順法即虛。不須析破。析破則逆法。何能通於無窮邪。若此則無一滯礙之法不虛而通也。準此滯含二義。一不滯寂。二不滯物也。前文云極耳目等。云何極耶。故此云審一氣等。一氣語借道家喻一性也。觀謂觀照即量智也。化謂萬化即一切事相也。遇謂對遇。適者。契合也。意云。諦審一氣之性以觀萬化。則凡所對遇無不順性而契合。如此雖極目觀色。無非實相。縱耳聆音反聞自性。豈惑聲色而為制哉。前文雙出所以。但明不滯不制之相。此文乃釋內通外應之由。所以為異也。然了境由心依心照境。境則真俗不二第一真也。心則理量齊鑒中道智也。次下明之。
無滯而不通。故能混(
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 聽任聲音發出而不加以控制，那麼就能普遍地應和各種因緣，而不被『有』所束縛。像這樣既不滯留也不控制，是為什麼呢？
難道不是因為萬物本身就是空虛的，所以外物不能夠拖累它的神明嗎？（這是）同時說明『出』和『所以』。萬物指的是聲、色等各種現象。因為隨緣而沒有自性，所以說是空虛的。『累』指的是拖累。『神明』就是上面的神心。意思是說，既然認識到萬物的空虛，就能證明它不會滯留，應和它也不會被控制，又怎麼會拖累神明呢？這上面是依據外境來辨別內心，似乎是兩種智慧各自照見。既然認識到萬物的空虛而歸於同一本源，那麼就自然是從真如本性中生出的權用，而沒有什麼不同。
因此，聖人憑藉著真心而使事理順暢，就沒有什麼滯留而不通達的；審察那同一的本性來觀察萬物的變化，所以所遇到的事物都合乎本性而順應。（這是）再次解釋前面的文句。前面說通達神心等等，要怎樣才能通達呢？所以這裡說憑藉真心而使事理順暢等等。『乘』是憑藉的意思，真心就是理智。理屬於空性的道理，不違逆事物所以叫做『順』。正理在於順應，順應法則就是空虛，不需要分析破除。分析破除就是違逆法則，又怎麼能通達無窮的變化呢？如果這樣，就沒有一種滯礙之法不是因為空虛而通達的。依照這個，『滯』包含兩種含義：一是不滯留于寂靜，二是不滯留於事物。前面的文句說窮盡耳目的功能等等，要怎樣才能窮盡呢？所以這裡說審察同一的本性等等。『一氣』這個詞借用道家的說法，比喻同一的本性。『觀』是觀照，就是量智。『化』是萬物的變化，就是一切事相。『遇』是對遇，『適』是契合。意思是說，仔細審察同一本性的本體來觀察萬物的變化，那麼凡是所對遇到的事物沒有不順應本性而契合的。像這樣，即使窮盡目光來觀看顏色，沒有不是實相的；縱然用耳朵來聽聲音，反而能反聞自性，又怎麼會被聲音和顏色所迷惑而受到控制呢？前面的文句同時說明『所以』，只是說明不滯留不控制的現象，這篇文章是解釋內在通達外在應和的原因，這就是它們不同的地方。然而，瞭解外境是由於內心，依靠內心來照見外境，外境就是真俗不二的第一義諦。內心就是理智和量智同時鑑照的中道智慧。下面將要說明這些。
沒有滯留而不通達，所以能夠混同
【English Translation】 English version If one allows sounds to arise without controlling them, then one can universally respond to all conditions without being bound by 'existence'. Why is it that one is neither attached nor controlled in this way?
Is it not because all things are inherently empty, and therefore external things cannot burden its spiritual clarity? (This) simultaneously explains 'emergence' and 'reason'. 'All things' refers to various phenomena such as sounds and sights. Because they arise from conditions and have no inherent nature, they are said to be empty. 'Burden' refers to encumbrance. 'Spiritual clarity' refers to the aforementioned divine mind. The meaning is that, since one recognizes the emptiness of all things, one can prove that it will not be attached, and responding to it will not be controlled, so how could it burden the spiritual clarity? The above uses external circumstances to distinguish the inner mind, seemingly with two distinct wisdoms illuminating separately. Since one recognizes the emptiness of all things and returns to the same source, then it is naturally the expedient function arising from true nature, and there is no difference.
Therefore, the sage relies on the true mind to make principles flow smoothly, so there is nothing obstructed and not understood; examining the one essence to observe the transformations of all things, so everything encountered conforms to the nature and adapts. (This is) re-explaining the previous sentences. The previous sentences said to understand the divine mind, etc. How can one understand? So here it says relying on the true mind to make principles flow smoothly, etc. 'Relying' means depending on, the true mind is intelligence. Principle belongs to the principle of emptiness, not opposing things so it is called 'smooth'. Correct principle lies in conforming, conforming to the law is emptiness, no need to analyze and break it. Analyzing and breaking it is opposing the law, how can one understand infinite changes? If so, there is no obstructing law that is not understood because of emptiness. According to this, 'obstruction' contains two meanings: one is not attached to stillness, and the other is not attached to things. The previous sentences said to exhaust the functions of the ears and eyes, etc. How can one exhaust them? So here it says examining the one essence, etc. The term 'one essence' borrows from Taoist sayings, metaphorically referring to the same nature. 'Observation' is contemplation, which is measuring wisdom. 'Transformation' is the transformation of all things, which is all phenomena. 'Encounter' is encountering, 'adapt' is conforming. The meaning is that, carefully examining the essence of the one nature to observe the transformations of all things, then everything encountered conforms to the nature and adapts. Like this, even if one exhausts the eyes to look at colors, there is nothing that is not true reality; even if one uses the ears to listen to sounds, one can instead hear one's own nature, so how can one be deluded by sounds and sights and be controlled? The previous sentences simultaneously explained 'reason', only explaining the phenomenon of not being attached and not being controlled, this article explains the reason for inner understanding and outer response, this is their difference. However, understanding the external environment is due to the inner mind, relying on the inner mind to illuminate the external environment, the external environment is the non-dual first principle of truth and falsehood. The inner mind is the middle way wisdom of intelligence and measuring wisdom simultaneously illuminating. These will be explained below.
Without obstruction and not understanding, so it can blend
融也)雜致(得也)淳。所遇而順適故則觸物而一(中也)躡前會歸中道也 淳雜者。以二諦言之。俗諦故雜。真諦故淳。以中道言之。二諦相待亦雜也。中道無二故淳也。今文是此則二諦融會。二而不二之中也。觸謂心所對觸。即緣生諸法也。以從緣非有緣起不無。故觸物皆一。一即第一真諦也。清涼云。觸物皆中居然交徹。此皆論于中者論之所宗故。又只可觀察世俗而入第一真諦。不應觀察第一真諦而入世俗也。故涅槃云。世諦者。即第一義諦。如清涼鈔具敘。
如此則萬象雖殊而不能自異。不能自異故知象非真象。象非真像故。則雖象而非像 如此者。屬前混雜致淳等。既淳既一。豈云異乎。正義至此略周。結歸本題也。初四句結不真。后二句結空可知。云庵本中失后二句。但有不真之理。缺于空義。今從古本。
然則物我同根是非一氣(體也)潛微隱幽殆(將也)非群情之所盡 將破三家謬計。故復舉甚深之理。難解難入致令所見未徹也。物即真俗融通之境。我則權實雙融之心。同根者。心境相收無異故。是非者。真俗也。亦相即故一氣也。生公云。是非相待故有真俗名生。茍一諦為真。四言成權矣。潛微下理深曰潛。難見曰隱。群情容解。但不能盡之。如三家者。
故頃爾(近也)談論
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：融合是使事物變得純粹的方式。順應所遇到的情況，那麼接觸萬物時就能達到統一（即中道），遵循前人的經驗最終迴歸中道。所謂純粹與混雜，是從二諦（真諦和俗諦）的角度來說的。從俗諦的角度看，事物是混雜的；從真諦的角度看，事物是純粹的。從中道的角度看，二諦相互依存，也是混雜的；中道沒有對立，所以是純粹的。現在的經文說的就是二諦融合，既是二，又不是二的狀態。『觸』指的是心所接觸的對象，也就是因緣所生的諸法。因為諸法由因緣而生，並非實有，但緣起也不是空無，所以接觸萬物都能歸於統一，這個『一』就是第一義諦。清涼澄觀大師說，接觸萬物都能體現中道，並且交融通徹。這些都是論述中道的人所遵循的宗旨。而且，只能通過觀察世俗諦來進入第一義諦，不應該通過觀察第一義諦來進入世俗諦。所以《涅槃經》說，世諦就是第一義諦，詳細的解釋可以參考清涼澄觀大師的《涅槃經疏鈔》。 這樣一來，萬象雖然千差萬別，卻不能各自獨立存在。因為不能各自獨立存在，所以知道現象並非真實的現象。因為現象並非真實的現象，所以雖然是現象，卻又不是現象。』如此『指的是前面所說的混雜而歸於純粹等等。既然已經純粹和統一，怎麼會有差異呢？正義到這裡大致完備，總結迴歸到本題。前面的四句總結了不真實，後面的兩句總結了空性是可以認識的。云庵的原本中缺少後面的兩句，只有不真實的道理，缺少空性的意義，現在採用古本。 這樣看來，物與我同根同源，是非也本為一體（本體）。這種深奧微妙的道理，不是一般人能夠完全理解的。』將『是想要破斥三家的錯誤見解，所以再次提出深奧的道理，難以理解和進入，導致人們的見解不夠透徹。物指的是真諦和俗諦融通的境界，我指的是權智和實智雙融的心。同根指的是心與境相互包容，沒有差異。是非指的是真諦和俗諦，因為相互依存，所以是一體。生公說，因為是非相互依存，所以才有了真諦和俗諦的名稱。如果只認為一個諦是真實的，那麼四句話就都成了權宜之說。深奧微妙的道理難以見到，難以理解，一般人可以理解，但不能完全理解，就像三家那樣。 所以，頃刻之間就開始談論。
【English Translation】 English version: Fusion is the way to achieve purity. By adapting to circumstances, one can attain unity (the Middle Way) when encountering all things, following the experiences of predecessors to ultimately return to the Middle Way. 'Purity' and 'mixture' are discussed from the perspective of the Two Truths (Satya-dvaya) (ultimate truth and conventional truth). From the perspective of conventional truth, things are mixed; from the perspective of ultimate truth, things are pure. From the perspective of the Middle Way, the Two Truths are interdependent and also mixed; the Middle Way has no duality, so it is pure. The current text speaks of the fusion of the Two Truths, a state that is both two and not two. 'Touch' refers to the objects that the mind encounters, which are the dharmas arising from conditions (pratītyasamutpāda). Because dharmas arise from conditions, they are not truly existent, but arising from conditions is not non-existence either, so encountering all things can be unified, and this 'one' is the ultimate truth (paramārtha-satya). Qingliang Chengguan (a famous buddhist monk) said that encountering all things embodies the Middle Way and is interpenetrating and thorough. These are the principles followed by those who discuss the Middle Way. Moreover, one can only enter the ultimate truth by observing the conventional truth; one should not enter the conventional truth by observing the ultimate truth. Therefore, the Nirvana Sutra says that conventional truth is ultimate truth, and a detailed explanation can be found in Qingliang Chengguan's Nirvana Sutra Commentary. In this way, although the myriad phenomena are different, they cannot exist independently. Because they cannot exist independently, we know that phenomena are not true phenomena. Because phenomena are not true phenomena, although they are phenomena, they are not phenomena. 'Thus' refers to the aforementioned mixing and returning to purity, and so on. Since it is already pure and unified, how can there be differences? The true meaning is roughly complete here, summarizing and returning to the topic. The first four sentences summarize the untruth, and the last two sentences summarize that emptiness is knowable. The Yun'an version lacks the last two sentences, only having the principle of untruth, lacking the meaning of emptiness; now we adopt the ancient version. In this view, things and self share the same root, and right and wrong are also one and the same (essence). This profound and subtle principle is not something that ordinary people can fully understand. 'Will' is to refute the erroneous views of the three schools, so it once again raises profound principles, difficult to understand and enter, leading to incomplete views. 'Things' refers to the realm of the fusion of ultimate truth and conventional truth, and 'self' refers to the mind of the dual fusion of expedient wisdom and true wisdom. 'Same root' means that mind and environment encompass each other without difference. 'Right and wrong' refers to ultimate truth and conventional truth, because they are interdependent, so they are one. Master Sheng Gong said that because right and wrong are interdependent, the names of ultimate truth and conventional truth arise. If only one truth is considered real, then all four sentences become expedient teachings. The profound and subtle principles are difficult to see, difficult to understand, and ordinary people can understand them, but not fully, like the three schools. Therefore, in a short while, they begin to discuss.
。至於虛宗每有不同。夫以不同而適同。有何物而可同哉。故眾論競作而性莫同焉 初句舉時謬之輩。由正理幽隱。所以近來云云。次二句見異。次二句執異背同。后二句依見述論。唐光瑤禪師疏有七宗。此論略出三家。故云眾也。見既有異性理隨殊。
何則(通徴)心無者無心於萬物。萬物未嘗無 據梁傳。晉僧道恒述心無論。汰公遠公俱破此說。初句牒。次句謂心無諸法。后句執法實有。
此得在於神靜。失在於物虛 由心無法故得於神靜。不了物空故失虛也。亦心外有境。
即色者明色不自色。故雖色而非色也 東晉支道林作即色游玄論。初句牒。次二句敘彼所計。彼謂青黃等相非色自能。人名為青黃等。心若不計青黃等皆空。以釋經中色即是空。
夫言色者。但當色即色。豈侍色(計也)色而後為色哉 齊此論主破辭。此且先出正理。初句牒名。次句示依他。謂凡是質礙之色。緣會而生者心雖不計。亦色法也。受想等法亦應例同。意云。豈待人心計彼謂青黃等。然後作青等色耶。以青黃亦緣生故。
此直(但也)語色不自色。未領(解也)色之非色也 初句明所待。后句顯所失。未達緣起性空。然緣起之法亦心之相分。能見之心隨相而轉。取相立名名青黃等。名屬遍計相即依
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：至於虛宗，各自有不同的見解。如果用不同的見解去適應所謂的『同』，那麼究竟有什麼東西是可以相同的呢？所以各種議論紛紛出現，但對於事物本性的理解卻無法達成一致。『初句舉時謬之輩』，是說因為真正的道理幽深隱晦，所以近來出現了種種謬論。接下來的兩句是說他們持有不同的見解。再接下來的兩句是說他們執著于不同，背離了相同。最後兩句是說他們依據自己的見解來闡述議論。唐朝的光瑤禪師的疏解中有七宗的說法，這裡只略微提到了三家，所以說是『眾』。既然見解已經有了差異，那麼對於事物本性的理解也就會隨著不同。
什麼叫做『心無』（普遍的概括）呢？就是說心對於萬物沒有執著，而萬物卻從來沒有不存在過。根據《梁傳》記載，晉朝的僧人道恒著有《心無論》，汰法師和遠法師都曾破斥這種說法。第一句是引述對方的觀點。第二句是說心如果不存在，那麼諸法（一切事物）也就不存在。第三句是說他們執著于諸法的真實存在。
這種觀點的得在於認為神是靜止的，失在於認為萬物是虛無的。因為他們認為心不存在，所以才認為神是靜止的。因為不瞭解萬物是空性的，所以才認為萬物是虛無的。這也是一種認為心外有境的觀點。
所謂『即色』，是說要明白色本身不是它自己產生的。所以雖然是色，但又不是色。東晉的支道林寫了《即色游玄論》。第一句是引述對方的觀點。接下來的兩句是敘述他們的想法。他們認為青色、黃色等現象不是色自身產生的，而是人給它們起了青色、黃色等名字。如果心中沒有對青色、黃色等的分別計較，那麼這些就都是空性的。這是用來說明佛經中『色即是空』的道理。
所謂『言色』，就應當直接認識到色就是色，難道要等待（計較）色之後，才能認為是色嗎？這裡是此論的作者駁斥對方的言論。這裡先提出正確的道理。第一句是引述對方的觀點。第二句是說明依他起性。意思是說，凡是具有質礙的色法，都是因緣和合而生的，即使心中沒有計較，它也是色法。受、想等法也應該按照這個例子來理解。意思是說，難道要等待人心去計較它，認為它是青色、黃色等，然後它才成為青色等嗎？因為青色、黃色也是因緣所生的。
這只是（但也）說了色不是它自己產生的，並沒有理解（明白）色本身就是非色的道理。第一句是說明他們所依賴的觀點。后一句是說明他們所缺失的。他們沒有理解緣起性空的道理。然而，緣起之法也是心識的相分。能見之心隨著外相而轉動，對外相進行取捨並給它起名字，比如青色、黃色等。這些名字屬於遍計所執，而外相則屬於依他起性。
【English Translation】 English version: As for the illusory schools, each has its own different views. If one tries to reconcile these different views to achieve a so-called 'sameness,' what is there that can truly be the same? Therefore, various arguments arise, but a consensus on the nature of things cannot be reached. 'The first sentence refers to those who err in their understanding of the times,' meaning that because the true principles are profound and hidden, various fallacies have emerged recently. The next two sentences state that they hold different views. The following two sentences state that they are attached to differences and deviate from sameness. The last two sentences state that they expound their arguments based on their own views. In the commentary by Chan Master Guangyao of the Tang Dynasty, there are seven schools mentioned, but this discussion only briefly mentions three, hence the term 'various.' Since there are already differences in views, the understanding of the nature of things will also vary accordingly.
What is meant by 'mindlessness' (a general summary)? It means that the mind has no attachment to the myriad things, but the myriad things have never ceased to exist. According to the Liang Zhuan, the monk Daoheng of the Jin Dynasty wrote the Treatise on Mindlessness, which was refuted by Dharma Master Tai and Dharma Master Yuan. The first sentence quotes the opponent's view. The second sentence states that if the mind does not exist, then all dharmas (all things) would not exist either. The third sentence states that they are attached to the real existence of dharmas.
The gain of this view lies in considering the spirit to be static, and the loss lies in considering the myriad things to be empty. Because they believe that the mind does not exist, they consider the spirit to be static. Because they do not understand that the myriad things are empty in nature, they consider the myriad things to be illusory. This is also a view that believes there is a realm outside the mind.
The so-called 'identity of form' means understanding that form itself is not self-produced. Therefore, although it is form, it is not form. Zhi Daolin of the Eastern Jin Dynasty wrote the Treatise on Roaming the Profound in the Identity of Form. The first sentence quotes the opponent's view. The next two sentences describe their thoughts. They believe that phenomena such as blue and yellow are not produced by form itself, but rather people give them names such as blue and yellow. If there is no discrimination or calculation of blue, yellow, etc. in the mind, then these are all empty in nature. This is used to explain the principle in the sutras that 'form is emptiness'.
The so-called 'speaking of form' should directly recognize that form is form. Is it necessary to wait for (calculating) form before considering it to be form? Here, the author of this treatise refutes the opponent's words. Here, the correct principle is first presented. The first sentence quotes the opponent's view. The second sentence explains dependent origination. It means that all forms with substance and obstruction are produced by the aggregation of conditions, and even if there is no calculation in the mind, it is still form. Phenomena such as sensation and conception should also be understood according to this example. It means, is it necessary to wait for the human mind to calculate it, considering it to be blue, yellow, etc., before it becomes blue, etc.? Because blue and yellow are also produced by conditions.
This only (but also) says that form is not self-produced, and does not understand (comprehend) the principle that form itself is non-form. The first sentence explains the view they rely on. The latter sentence explains what they lack. They do not understand the principle of emptiness of nature arising from dependent origination. However, the dharma of dependent origination is also a phase of consciousness. The seeing mind moves with external appearances, grasping and naming them, such as blue, yellow, etc. These names belong to the completely conceptualized, while the external appearances belong to the dependently originated.
他。支公已了名假。未了相空。名相俱空圓成顯現。由未了此。所以被破。
本無者情尚于無。多觸言以賓(伏也)無。故非有有即無。非無無即無 亦東晉竺法汰作本無論。初二句明其尚無。中心崇尚于無。故凡所發言皆賓伏于無也。次四句出彼解相。以經論有雙非之句。汰公解云。非有者。非斥了有。非無者。和無亦無。卻則淪於太無爾。
尋夫立文之本旨者。直(正也)以非有非真有。非無非真無爾 論主與示雙非正理。然後破之。經論成立非有非無之本意者。正以諸法賴緣而有。非真實有故云非有。以諸法緣起故有。非一向無故云非無。圭峰略鈔之義如此。下論亦多請無疑慮。
何必非有無此有。非無無彼無。此直好無之談。豈謂順通事(物也)實(性也)即物之情(解也)哉 初二句斥彼謬計義不異前。何必者責彼之辭。后二句直破其非尚無如此。豈是順物達性即物見中之解耶。今詳破此三家。前二家許其所得。破其所失。汰師尚無。一向破斥者。亦以著空之見難治故也。非特撥無因果。亦恐惡取斷空。如智論說食鹽之喻也。據梁傳。支汰二師皆出類離群世間之英者。正由道源初浸。又經論未廣。明師罕遇。致有此弊。不可見破便輕前修自下正述論文。大科有三初。理絕名相謂。欲寄名
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：他（指支遁）。支遁已經瞭解了『名假』（名只是假象）的道理，但還沒有了解『相空』（現象是空性的）的道理。當名和相都空了的時候，圓滿成就的實相才會顯現。因為支遁沒有了解這個道理，所以他的觀點會被破斥。
『本無』（以『本無』為宗）的觀點崇尚于『無』，所以經常用言語來遷就（或迎合）『無』。因此，『非有』並不是說『有』就是『無』，『非無』也不是說『無』就是『無』。東晉的竺法汰寫了《本無論》。最初兩句說明他崇尚『無』。他的中心思想是崇尚『無』，所以凡是他所說的話，都是爲了迎合『無』。接下來的四句解釋了他的觀點。他引用經論中『雙非』的句子，竺法汰解釋說：『非有』，不是完全否定『有』；『非無』，是連『無』也要否定。這樣就陷入了太虛無之中。
探究設立文字的根本宗旨，正是要說明『非有』不是真『有』，『非無』不是真『無』。論主先闡明『雙非』的正理，然後破斥它。經論成立『非有非無』的本意，正是因為諸法依賴因緣而生，不是真實存在的，所以說是『非有』；因為諸法由因緣而起，不是完全沒有的，所以說是『非無』。圭峰禪師的《略鈔》中的解釋就是這樣。下面的論述還有很多，請不要疑惑。
何必說『非有』就沒有『此有』，『非無』就沒有『彼無』呢？這只是喜歡談論『無』的說法，怎麼能說是順應事物的實性和本質，從而理解事物的真相呢？』最初兩句是責備對方的錯誤觀點，意思和前面一樣。『何必』是責備的語氣。后兩句直接破斥他崇尚『無』的錯誤。難道這是順應事物，通達實性，從而理解事物真相的解釋嗎？現在詳細分析破斥這三家。前兩家承認他們有所得，但破斥他們所失。對於竺法汰的『尚無』，則是一概破斥，因為執著于空的見解難以糾正。這不僅是撥無因果，也是爲了防止惡取斷滅空，就像《智度論》中說的食鹽的比喻一樣。據《梁傳》記載，支遁和竺法汰都是出類拔萃的世間英才。正是因為佛法剛剛傳入，經論還不廣泛，難以遇到明師，才導致了這種弊端。不能因為破斥就輕視前人，下面正式闡述論文。大的綱要有三個，首先是理絕名相，意思是想要藉助名相。
【English Translation】 English version: He (referring to Zhi Dun). Zhi Dun already understood the principle of 'name as a false appearance' (ming jia), but had not yet understood the principle of 'form as emptiness' (xiang kong). When both name and form are empty, the perfectly accomplished reality will manifest. Because Zhi Dun did not understand this principle, his views are refuted.
The view of 'original non-being' (ben wu) values 'non-being', so it often uses language to accommodate (or cater to) 'non-being'. Therefore, 'not being' does not mean that 'being' is 'non-being', and 'not non-being' does not mean that 'non-being' is 'non-being'. Zhu Fatai of the Eastern Jin Dynasty wrote the 'Treatise on Original Non-being' (Ben Wu Lun). The first two sentences explain his valuing of 'non-being'. His central idea is to value 'non-being', so everything he says is to cater to 'non-being'. The next four sentences explain his view. He quotes the 'double negation' sentences in the scriptures, and Zhu Fatai explains: 'Not being' does not completely deny 'being'; 'not non-being' even denies 'non-being'. This falls into utter nothingness.
Exploring the fundamental purpose of establishing writing is precisely to explain that 'not being' is not true 'being', and 'not non-being' is not true 'non-being'. The author first clarifies the correct principle of 'double negation', and then refutes it. The original intention of establishing 'not being, not non-being' in the scriptures is precisely because all dharmas arise dependently on conditions, and are not truly existent, so it is said to be 'not being'; because all dharmas arise from conditions, they are not completely non-existent, so it is said to be 'not non-being'. This is the explanation in Chan Master Guifeng's 'Brief Commentary' (Lue Chao). There is much more discussion below, please do not have doubts.
Why must it be said that 'not being' has no 'this being', and 'not non-being' has no 'that non-being'? This is just a saying that likes to talk about 'non-being', how can it be said to be in accordance with the reality and essence of things, thereby understanding the truth of things?' The first two sentences are to blame the other party's wrong view, and the meaning is the same as before. 'Why must' is a blaming tone. The last two sentences directly refute his mistake of valuing 'non-being'. Is this an explanation that conforms to things, understands the essence, and thus understands the truth of things? Now analyze in detail the refutation of these three schools. The first two schools admit that they have gained something, but refute what they have lost. For Zhu Fatai's 'valuing of non-being', it is refuted in general, because the view of attachment to emptiness is difficult to correct. This is not only denying cause and effect, but also to prevent the evil grasping of annihilation emptiness, just like the analogy of eating salt in the 'Great Perfection of Wisdom Treatise' (Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra). According to the 'Liang Biography', Zhi Dun and Zhu Fatai were both outstanding talents in the world. It was precisely because Buddhism had just been introduced, the scriptures were not yet widespread, and it was difficult to meet enlightened teachers, that this shortcoming occurred. One cannot despise the predecessors because of refutation, and the paper will be formally elaborated below. There are three major outlines, the first is the principle of transcending names and forms, meaning to use names and forms.
依相顯示。先示名相本虛真諦超出。令悟了法不在言。善入無言際也。二寄詮顯實。以名相雖虛亦可假詮以顯實理。即無離文字說解脫也。三至論末引放光等示妄顯真。謂雖依詮顯實。若著名相妄想是生。何能悟入第一之真。若悟名相本虛。即名相而如智顯現。不在舍于文也。故我說。法如筏喻者。文字性空即是解脫。十二分教無非如也。一論大旨妙在於斯。但血脈沉隱故具出之。
夫以(依也)物物(名)於物。則所物而可物 若依相立名隨名取物。則凡是所名之物皆可為物。此謂妄心所計名相俱有。
以物(名)物(相)非物。故雖物(名)而非物(名) 初句相空。后句名空。以二法皆事故。通名為物。意以所名之物。但依他起元無自性。況名依相有。豈有實體也。故密嚴云。世間眾色法但相無有餘。唯依相立名。是名無實事。
是以物不即名而就實。名不即物而履(行)真(實) 釋此有二。一通。二局。通者。名相二法該盡俗諦。然性各異。互推無在顯兩虛也。初句物不在於名中。以名非物故召火不燒其口。次句名不在於物中。以物非名故。見物不知其名。應知因物立名以名名物。俗假施設竟不相到。故不能互顯其真實。如火以熱為實等。局者。但屬此論。名謂名教。相謂義相。所以空
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 依附於現象而進行顯示。首先揭示名相（nāma-rūpa，名稱和形式）的本質是虛幻的，真諦超越了名相，從而使人領悟到佛法不在於言語，能夠很好地進入無言的境界。第二，藉助言語來闡釋實在，因為名相雖然是虛幻的，也可以借用它來闡釋實在的道理，這就是不離文字說解脫。第三，在論述的結尾引用放光等事例來揭示虛妄，顯現真實，意思是說，即使依賴言語來闡釋實在，如果執著于名相，妄想就會產生，又怎麼能夠領悟進入第一義諦的真實呢？如果領悟到名相的本質是虛幻的，那麼名相本身就如智慧般顯現，不必捨棄文字。所以我說，佛法如筏的譬喻，文字的自性本空就是解脫，十二分教（dvādaśāṅga-dharma，佛經的十二種分類）無不如此。這部論的大旨精妙就在於此，只是血脈深沉隱晦，所以全部揭示出來。
憑藉（依靠）事物（名稱）來稱呼事物，那麼被稱呼的事物就可以被認為是事物。如果依據現象來建立名稱，隨著名稱來取事物，那麼凡是被命名的事物都可以被認為是事物。這說明妄心所計度的名相都是實有的。
用事物（名稱）來稱呼事物（現象），但事物並非事物。所以，雖然是事物（名稱），但並非事物（名稱）。第一句說的是現象是空性的，后一句說的是名稱是空性的。因為這兩種法都是因緣和合而成的，所以統稱為事物。意思是說，被命名的事物，只是依他而起，原本沒有自性。更何況名稱是依附於現象而有的，哪裡有實體呢？所以《密嚴經》說：『世間各種色法，只有現象而沒有其他，只是依據現象來建立名稱，這種名稱沒有真實的事體。』
因此，事物不直接就是名稱，而是趨向于真實；名稱不直接就是事物，而是踐行真實。對此有兩種解釋：一是通釋，二是局釋。通釋是說，名相這兩種法涵蓋了世俗諦，然而性質各不相同，互相推論，都無法顯現，從而顯現出兩者的虛幻性。第一句說事物不在名稱之中，因為名稱不是事物，所以呼喚火併不能燒傷嘴巴。第二句說名稱不在事物之中，因為事物不是名稱，所以見到事物卻不知道它的名稱。應該知道，因為事物而建立名稱，用名稱來稱呼事物，世俗的假立施設最終不能互相到達，所以不能互相顯現其真實，比如火以熱為真實等。局釋是說，只屬於這部論，名稱指的是名教，現象指的是義相，所以是空性的。
【English Translation】 English version: Displaying based on appearances. First, it reveals that the essence of nāma-rūpa (name and form) is illusory, and the true meaning transcends nāma-rūpa, thereby enabling people to realize that the Dharma is not in words, and to be able to enter the realm of non-verbal expression well. Second, it uses language to explain reality, because although nāma-rūpa is illusory, it can also be used to explain the real principle, which is to explain liberation without leaving words. Third, at the end of the discussion, it cites examples such as emitting light to reveal illusion and manifest truth, meaning that even if relying on language to explain reality, if one is attached to nāma-rūpa, delusion will arise, how can one realize and enter the truth of the first meaning? If one realizes that the essence of nāma-rūpa is illusory, then nāma-rūpa itself will appear like wisdom, and there is no need to abandon words. Therefore, I say that the Dharma is like a raft, and the emptiness of the nature of words is liberation, and the dvādaśāṅga-dharma (twelve categories of Buddhist scriptures) are all like this. The wonderful essence of this treatise lies in this, but the bloodline is deep and obscure, so it is all revealed.
Relying (depending) on things (names) to call things, then the things that are called can be considered things. If names are established based on appearances, and things are taken according to names, then all things that are named can be considered things. This shows that the nāma-rūpa measured by the deluded mind are all real.
Using things (names) to call things (phenomena), but things are not things. Therefore, although it is a thing (name), it is not a thing (name). The first sentence says that phenomena are empty, and the second sentence says that names are empty. Because these two dharmas are both caused by conditions, they are collectively called things. It means that the things that are named are only dependently originated and originally have no self-nature. Moreover, names are attached to phenomena, so where is there a substance? Therefore, the Ghanavyūha Sūtra says: 'The various forms in the world are only phenomena and nothing else. Names are only established based on phenomena, and these names have no real substance.'
Therefore, things are not directly names, but tend to be real; names are not directly things, but practice reality. There are two explanations for this: one is a general explanation, and the other is a specific explanation. The general explanation is that the two dharmas of nāma-rūpa cover the conventional truth, but their natures are different. Reasoning with each other cannot reveal them, thus revealing the illusion of both. The first sentence says that things are not in names, because names are not things, so calling fire cannot burn the mouth. The second sentence says that names are not in things, because things are not names, so seeing things does not know their names. It should be known that names are established because of things, and names are used to call things. The conventional false establishment ultimately cannot reach each other, so they cannot reveal each other's reality, such as fire taking heat as reality, etc. The specific explanation is that it only belongs to this treatise. Name refers to the teaching of names, and phenomenon refers to the appearance of meaning, so it is empty.
者。方便安立各無自效能所詮異故不即。就論意雖通其旨實局。以下云真諦獨靜于名教之外。故為此釋。
然則真然諦獨靜于名教之外。豈曰文言之能辨哉 真諦第一義也。非名言可說。非義相可示。直以名相本空故也然不能杜默。聊復厝(置)言以擬之。試論之曰 理須言顯。亦不能閉口默然也。擬謂比擬。意云。但依言彷彿比擬真諦。而論量也。
摩訶衍論云。諸法亦非有相亦非無相。中觀云。諸法不有不無者。第一真諦也 初引智論。后第二十七中一句。又義引中論轉釋。云即第一真諦。引此二論以為宗依。下論廣釋。皆云諸法者。則統貫一切也。以是義宗故引通名。總辨即中之理。次下依宗開示。或約空色乃至言說心行等。一一別顯。末後引中觀等二論。約因緣生法以辨之。乃復總攝一切。非真空色等也。始末依此詳考。方知論旨成立之妙。第一者。真俗非二故。非真俗之二故。
尋夫不有不無者。豈謂滌除萬物杜塞視聽。寂寥虛豁。然後為真諦者乎 二論皆云。不有又不無者。非撥喪萬物閉目塞聰。絕色滅聲。取虛豁混茫之空。是真諦也。
誠以即物順通故。物莫之逆。即偽即真故。性莫之易 就物順通。非杜塞視聽故。不逆其物。即俗偽而顯真。何待虛豁。故不易其性也。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 這些（方便）是爲了安立（建立）各種沒有自性的能詮（表達者）和所詮（被表達者）的差異，所以說它們不是同一個東西。就論述的意義來說，雖然普遍，但它的主旨實際上是侷限的。下面說真諦是獨立於名教之外的，所以才做這樣的解釋。 然而，真諦是獨立於名教之外的，難道是文辭言語所能辨明的嗎？真諦是第一義諦（ परमार्थसत्य, Paramārtha-satya，最高的真理），不是名言可以表達的，不是義理形象可以展示的。直接原因是名相本身就是空性的。然而，又不能完全沉默不語，姑且設定言語來比擬它。試著論述它說：道理需要通過言語來顯現，也不能閉口不言。比擬的意思是模仿。意思是說，只是依靠言語來彷彿地比擬真諦，然後進行論量。 《摩訶衍論》說，諸法也不是有相，也不是無相。《中觀論》說，諸法不有不無，這就是第一真諦。首先引用《智論》，然後是《中論》第二十七章中的一句。又引用《中論》的義理來轉而解釋，說這就是第一真諦。引用這兩部論作為宗派的依據。下面的論述廣泛地解釋，都說諸法，就是統攝貫穿一切。因為這個義理是宗派的根本，所以引用普遍的名稱，總的辨明即中（不落兩邊）的道理。接下來依據宗派開示，或者從空色，乃至言說心行等方面，一一分別地顯現。最後引用《中觀論》等兩部論，從因緣生法的角度來辨明它，這才又總攝一切，不是真空色等。從始至終依據這些詳細考察，才能知道論旨成立的奧妙。第一，是因為真俗不是二元對立的，也不是非真非俗的二元對立。 探尋那不有不無的道理，難道是說要滌除萬物，杜絕視聽，寂靜空虛，然後才是真諦嗎？這兩部論都說，不有也不無，不是要拋棄萬物，閉上眼睛堵住耳朵，斷絕色相聲音，取那種空虛混茫的空，才是真諦。 實在是因為順應事物而通達，所以事物不會違逆它。因為即偽即真，所以本性不會改變。就事物本身而順應通達，不是杜絕視聽，所以不會違逆事物。即俗諦（Samvriti-satya，世俗諦）的虛偽而顯現真諦（Paramārtha-satya，勝義諦），何必等待空虛？所以本性不會改變。
【English Translation】 English version: These (expedients) are for establishing the differences between the expresser (the signifier) and the expressed (the signified), both of which lack inherent existence, so they are not the same thing. Regarding the meaning of the discourse, although it is universal, its main point is actually limited. The following says that the true reality (真諦, Zhēndì, Paramārtha-satya) is independent of the teachings of names and concepts (名教, Míngjiào), so this explanation is made. However, if the true reality (真諦, Zhēndì, Paramārtha-satya) is independent of the teachings of names and concepts (名教, Míngjiào), how can it be discerned by words and language? The true reality (真諦, Zhēndì, Paramārtha-satya) is the ultimate truth (第一義諦, Dìyī yìdì, Paramārtha-satya), which cannot be expressed by names and words, nor can it be shown by conceptual images. The direct reason is that names and characteristics are inherently empty. However, one cannot remain completely silent, so one tentatively sets up language to approximate it. Let's try to discuss it: the principle needs to be revealed through language, and one cannot remain silent. Approximation means imitation. It means that one only relies on language to vaguely approximate the true reality (真諦, Zhēndì, Paramārtha-satya), and then makes judgments. The Mahayana Treatise says that all dharmas are neither existent nor non-existent. The Madhyamaka-karika says that all dharmas are neither existent nor non-existent, and this is the ultimate truth (第一真諦, Dìyī zhēndì, Paramārtha-satya). First, the Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra is cited, and then a sentence from the twenty-seventh chapter of the Madhyamaka-karika. Also, the meaning of the Madhyamaka-karika is cited to explain that this is the ultimate truth (第一真諦, Dìyī zhēndì, Paramārtha-satya). These two treatises are cited as the basis of the school. The following discussion explains extensively, saying that all dharmas encompass everything. Because this meaning is the foundation of the school, a universal name is cited to generally clarify the principle of the Middle Way (即中, Jí zhōng, not falling into extremes). Next, according to the school, it is shown that, either from emptiness and form, or even from speech, mind, and actions, each is shown separately. Finally, the two treatises, such as the Madhyamaka-karika, are cited to clarify it from the perspective of conditioned arising, and then everything is encompassed again, not just empty form, etc. From beginning to end, examine these in detail to understand the subtlety of the establishment of the thesis. First, it is because the conventional truth (俗諦, Súdì, Samvriti-satya) and the ultimate truth (真諦, Zhēndì, Paramārtha-satya) are not dualistic, nor are they a dualistic opposition of non-conventional and non-ultimate. Exploring the principle of neither existent nor non-existent, does it mean that one must cleanse away all things, block sight and hearing, and be silent and empty, and then it is the true reality (真諦, Zhēndì, Paramārtha-satya)? Both treatises say that neither existent nor non-existent does not mean abandoning all things, closing one's eyes and blocking one's ears, cutting off form and sound, and taking that empty and chaotic emptiness as the true reality (真諦, Zhēndì, Paramārtha-satya). It is truly because of conforming to things and being accessible, so things will not go against it. Because it is both false and true, the nature will not change. Conforming to things themselves and being accessible, not blocking sight and hearing, so it will not go against things. Manifesting the true reality (真諦, Zhēndì, Paramārtha-satya) from the falsity of the conventional truth (俗諦, Súdì, Samvriti-satya), why wait for emptiness? Therefore, the nature will not change.
性莫之易故。雖無而有。物莫之逆故。雖有而無。雖有而無所謂非有。雖無而有所謂非無 初四句躡前釋成。以理事相即故。互存相奪故互亡也。后四句躡前釋成。非有非無之中也。此中真諦故無。俗諦故有。相奪兩非第一真也。
如此則非無物也。物非真物。物非真物故。於何而可物 即物示真性。真物假名相皆不立也。密嚴云。二合生分別名量亦非有。非真即題中不真。於何可物。即題中空字。自下依宗廣釋。皆初引教。后依教釋義。文雖各殊義旨無異。今依論中會釋。或約空色。或依二諦等。一一隨次明之。大要皆約諸法。以明不異第一之真也。
故經云。色之性空非色敗空 初依色空以釋中也。凈名經文。然諸經多有。
以明夫聖人之於物也。即萬物之自虛。豈待宰割以求通哉 空非色外色即是空。空色非一亦非異也。宰割析滅豈是即空。故二乘析色斷見未祛。亂意迷空即真未了。
是以寢疾有不真之談。超日有即虛之稱 雙引二經。皆證前義。初凈名問疾品略云。菩薩病者非真非有等。二超日明三昧經。彼云。不有受不保命四大虛也。四大色法法即空故。
然則三藏殊文統之者一也 文則殊說旨歸一揆。
故放光云。第一真諦無成無得。世俗諦故便有成有得 二
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本
自性是不可改變的。雖然看似沒有，但實際存在。萬物無法違逆自性，所以即使存在，也如同沒有。雖然存在卻如同沒有，這被稱為『非有』。雖然看似沒有，但實際存在，這被稱為『非無』。最初的四句承接前文解釋，因為理和事相互依存，所以相互存在，相互排斥，所以相互消失。后四句承接前文解釋，處於非有非無的中間狀態。這個中間狀態是真諦，所以是『無』；是俗諦，所以是『有』。相互排斥，兩者都不執著，才是第一真諦。
如此說來，就不是沒有事物。事物不是真實的事物。事物不是真實的事物，那麼，又如何能被認為是事物呢？直接從事物顯示真性。真實的事物和虛假的名相都不能成立。密嚴經說：『二合生分別名量亦非有。』不是真實的，就是題目中的『不真』。『於何可物』，就是題目中的『空』字。下面根據宗旨廣泛解釋，先引用經文，然後根據經文解釋含義。文字雖然各有不同，但意義旨趣沒有差異。現在根據論中的解釋，或者從空和色的角度，或者依據二諦等，一一按照順序說明。大要都是依據諸法，來闡明不異於第一真諦的道理。
所以經中說：『色之性空非色敗空。』最初依據色空來解釋中道。出自《維摩詰經》，但很多經中都有。
用來說明聖人對於萬物的態度，就是認識到萬物本性自虛。哪裡需要宰割分析來求得通達呢？空不是在色之外，色即是空。空和色非一也非異。宰割分析消滅，哪裡是體悟空性？所以二乘行人分析色法，斷除常見，但沒有去除亂想，迷惑于空，沒有了悟真性。
因此，《維摩詰經》中有關於寢疾非真的談論，《超日經》中有關於即虛的稱謂。』雙重引用兩部經，都是爲了證明前面的意義。最初，《維摩詰經·問疾品》中略略提到：菩薩的疾病不是真實的，不是存在的等等。《超日明三昧經》中說：『不有受不保命四大虛也。』四大是色法，法即是空。
如此說來，三藏經文說法不同，但統攝它們的道理是一致的。
所以《放光經》說：『第一真諦無成無得，世俗諦故便有成有得。』
【English Translation】 English version
The nature is immutable. Though seemingly nonexistent, it exists. Things cannot defy the nature, so even if they exist, it's as if they don't. Though existing as if nonexistent, this is called 'non-being'. Though seemingly nonexistent, it exists, this is called 'non-non-being'. The first four sentences build upon the previous explanation, because principle (理, Li) and phenomena (事, Shi) are interdependent, so they coexist, mutually repel, and therefore mutually disappear. The last four sentences build upon the previous explanation, being in the middle state of neither being nor non-being. This middle state is the ultimate truth (真諦, zhendi), so it is 'nonexistent'; it is the conventional truth (俗諦, sudi), so it is 'existent'. Mutual repulsion, not clinging to either, is the first and foremost truth.
Thus, it is not that there are no things. Things are not real things. If things are not real things, then how can they be considered things? Directly showing the true nature from things. Real things and false names cannot be established. The *Mi Yan Jing* (密嚴經) says: 'The combination of arising, discrimination, name, and measurement are also nonexistent.' Not real is the 'not real' in the title. 'How can they be considered things' is the 'emptiness' (空, Kong) in the title. The following is a broad explanation based on the principle, first quoting the scriptures, and then explaining the meaning based on the scriptures. Although the words are different, the meaning and purpose are the same. Now, according to the explanation in the treatise, either from the perspective of emptiness and form, or based on the two truths, etc., explain them one by one in order. The main point is to use all dharmas to clarify the principle of not being different from the first and foremost truth.
Therefore, the sutra says: 'The nature of form is emptiness, not that form is destroyed into emptiness.' Initially, using form and emptiness to explain the Middle Way. From the *Vimalakirti Sutra* (維摩詰經), but many sutras have it.
This is to explain the attitude of the sage towards all things, which is to recognize that the nature of all things is inherently empty. Where is the need to dissect and analyze to seek understanding? Emptiness is not outside of form, form is emptiness. Emptiness and form are neither one nor different. Dissecting, analyzing, and annihilating, how can one realize emptiness? Therefore, the *Sravakas* (聲聞) and *Pratyekabuddhas* (緣覺) analyze form and cut off common views, but have not removed the confusion, are confused about emptiness, and have not realized the true nature.
Therefore, in the *Vimalakirti Sutra* there is talk about illness not being real, and in the *Surya-garbha Sutra* (超日經) there is a saying about being immediately empty.' Doubly quoting two sutras, both to prove the previous meaning. Initially, the *Vimalakirti Sutra, Inquiry of Illness* (問疾品) briefly mentions: the illness of the *Bodhisattva* (菩薩) is not real, not existent, etc. The *Surya-garbha Samadhi Sutra* says: 'Not having reception, not protecting life, the four great elements are empty.' The four great elements are form, and the dharma is emptiness.
Thus, the three *Pitakas* (三藏) have different statements, but the principle that governs them is the same.
Therefore, the *Prajnaparamita Sutra* (放光經) says: 'The first and foremost truth has no accomplishment and no attainment, but because of the conventional truth, there is accomplishment and attainment.'
依成得以示也。放光第八云。世俗之事有逮有得。最第一者無有逮無有得。
夫有得即是無得之偽號。無得即是有得之真名。真名故雖真而非有。偽號故雖偽而非無 初二句辨得相真偽。住俗有得而非得故偽也。依真無得而乃得故真也。如下玄得中廣示。后四句躡釋前名。
是以言真未嘗有。言偽未嘗無。二言未始一。二理未始殊也 勝義故非有俗諦故非無。有無二言非一。中道之妙非二。
故經云。真諦俗諦謂有異耶。答曰。無異也 義引大品也。前雖有二諦但依成得辨之。今直約二諦以釋也。
此經直辨真諦。以明非有。俗諦以明非無。豈以諦二而二於物哉 二諦之義真俗宛分。二諦之體一物非異。
然則萬物果有其所以。不有有其所以不無。有其所以不有。故雖有而非有。有其所以不無故。雖無而非無。雖無而非無。無者不絕虛。雖有而非有。有者非真有。若有不即真。無不夷(平)跡(相) 初二句明萬物皆具非有非無。次四句躡示兩非。以入中道次四句亦躡前。如次不落斷常。后二句但成前四句。以非真有故。若有不即真。以非虛絕故。若無不夷跡。若字貫此。謂非宰割事蹟。然後是無。夷者。亦芟夷也。
然則有無稱異其致一也 真俗是體有無是義。依體辨義。義
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 依附於成就才能顯示出來。鳩摩羅什譯《放光般若經》第八品說：『世俗的事情有獲得也有失去，最根本的第一義諦是沒有獲得也沒有失去。』 所謂『獲得』，不過是『無得』的虛假名稱；而『無得』，才是『有得』的真實名稱。因為是真實名稱，所以雖然真實卻並非實有；因為是虛假名稱，所以雖然虛假卻並非全無。』開頭兩句辨析『得』的表象是真是假。安住於世俗，認為有『得』，但實際上並非真的『得』，所以是虛假的。依靠真諦，認識到沒有『得』，這才是真正的『得』，所以是真實的。如下文《玄得》中將詳細闡述。後面四句承接並解釋前面的名稱。 因此說，說它是『真』，卻未曾真正存在過；說它是『偽』，卻未曾完全不存在過。『真』和『偽』這兩種說法並非同一，『真』和『偽』這兩種道理也並非截然不同。』從勝義諦的角度來說，它並非實有；從世俗諦的角度來說，它並非全無。『有』和『無』這兩種說法並非同一，中道的奧妙之處在於它並非截然對立。 所以經書上說：『真諦和俗諦，可以認為它們是不同的嗎？』回答說：『沒有不同。』這裡引用的是《大品般若經》的義理。前面雖然提到了二諦，但那是依據成就和獲得來辨析的。現在直接依據二諦來解釋。 這部經直接辨析真諦，用來說明『非有』；辨析俗諦，用來說明『非無』。難道會因為二諦的區分，就認為萬物也是二元的嗎？』二諦的含義，真諦和俗諦區分得很清楚；二諦的本體，在萬物中並非不同。 如此說來，萬物確實有其存在的理由。並非因為『有』，就一定有其存在的理由；也並非因為『無』，就沒有其存在的理由。因為『有』，所以並非實有；因為『有』存在的理由，所以並非全無。雖然說『無』，但並非斷滅的虛無；雖然說『有』，但並非真實的『有』。如果『有』不是真實的，那麼『有』就不等同於真諦；如果『無』不是斷滅的，那麼『無』就不會抹平一切痕跡。』開頭兩句說明萬物都具備非有非無的性質。接著四句承接並揭示『兩非』，從而進入中道。再接著四句也是承接前面，依次不落入斷滅和常有的兩邊。最後兩句只是爲了成就前面的四句。因為不是真實的『有』，所以如果『有』就不等同於真諦。因為不是斷滅的虛無，所以如果『無』就不會抹平一切痕跡。『若』字貫穿於此，意思是並非宰割事蹟，然後才是『無』。『夷』，也是剷平的意思。 如此說來，『有』和『無』的稱謂雖然不同，但它們的根本道理是一致的。』真諦和俗諦是本體，『有』和『無』是作用。依據本體來辨析作用，作用...
【English Translation】 English version: It is through accomplishment that it can be shown. The eighth chapter of the Fang Guang Ban Ruo Jing (放光般若經) [Explanation of the Light Sutra], translated by Kumarajiva, says: 'In worldly matters, there is grasping and obtaining. The most supreme, the first principle, is without grasping and without obtaining.' 'That which is called 'obtaining' is merely a false name for 'non-obtaining'; and 'non-obtaining' is the true name for 'obtaining'. Because it is a true name, although true, it is not truly existent; because it is a false name, although false, it is not entirely non-existent.' The first two sentences distinguish the appearance of 'obtaining' as true or false. Abiding in the mundane, one thinks there is 'obtaining', but in reality, it is not truly 'obtaining', so it is false. Relying on the true principle, realizing there is no 'obtaining', this is true 'obtaining', so it is true. This will be elaborated in the following Xuan De [Profound Obtaining]. The last four sentences follow up and explain the preceding names. Therefore, it is said, 'Speaking of 'true', it has never truly existed; speaking of 'false', it has never completely not existed. The two words 'true' and 'false' are not the same, and the two principles of 'true' and 'false' are not entirely different.' From the perspective of paramārtha (勝義諦) [ultimate truth], it is not truly existent; from the perspective of saṃvṛti-satya (俗諦) [conventional truth], it is not entirely non-existent. The two words 'existent' and 'non-existent' are not the same, and the wonder of the Middle Way lies in that it is not absolutely opposed. Therefore, the sutra says: 'Can the satya-dvaya (二諦) [two truths], paramārtha-satya (真諦) [ultimate truth] and saṃvṛti-satya (俗諦) [conventional truth], be considered different?' The answer is: 'There is no difference.' This quotes the meaning of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra (大品般若經) [Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra]. Although the two truths were mentioned earlier, it was based on accomplishment and obtaining to distinguish them. Now, it is directly explained based on the two truths. This sutra directly distinguishes the paramārtha-satya (真諦) [ultimate truth] to explain 'non-existence'; and distinguishes the saṃvṛti-satya (俗諦) [conventional truth] to explain 'non-non-existence'. Would it be that because of the distinction of the two truths, one would consider all things to be dualistic?' The meaning of the two truths, paramārtha-satya (真諦) [ultimate truth] and saṃvṛti-satya (俗諦) [conventional truth], are clearly distinguished; the essence of the two truths, in all things, is not different. Thus, all things truly have their reason for existence. It is not because of 'existence' that there must be a reason for existence; nor is it because of 'non-existence' that there is no reason for existence. Because of 'existence', it is not truly existent; because there is a reason for 'existence', it is not entirely non-existent. Although it is said 'non-existence', it is not annihilationist emptiness; although it is said 'existence', it is not true 'existence'. If 'existence' is not true, then 'existence' is not the same as paramārtha-satya (真諦) [ultimate truth]; if 'non-existence' is not annihilationist, then 'non-existence' will not erase all traces.' The first two sentences explain that all things possess the nature of neither existence nor non-existence. The next four sentences follow up and reveal the 'two negations', thereby entering the Middle Way. The next four sentences also follow up the preceding, in order not to fall into the extremes of annihilationism and eternalism. The last two sentences are merely to accomplish the preceding four sentences. Because it is not true 'existence', therefore if 'existence' is not the same as paramārtha-satya (真諦) [ultimate truth]. Because it is not annihilationist emptiness, therefore if 'non-existence' will not erase all traces. The word 'if' runs through this, meaning it is not dissecting events, and then there is 'non-existence'. 'Erase' also means to level. Thus, although the names of 'existence' and 'non-existence' are different, their fundamental principle is the same.' Paramārtha-satya (真諦) [ultimate truth] and saṃvṛti-satya (俗諦) [conventional truth] are the essence, 'existence' and 'non-existence' are the function. Based on the essence to distinguish the function, the function...
亦一也。古人云。二諦並非雙。恒乖未曾各。
故童子嘆曰。說法不有亦不無。以因緣故諸法生。瓔珞經云。轉法輪者亦非有轉。亦非無轉。是謂轉無所轉 連引二經。依言說相。以顯中道。初即凈名經長者子寶積嘆佛偈也。初句嘆如來說法。與實相相應故。有說無說皆雙絕也。后句意云。有無既絕。何故現一切言說。答云。以俗諦因緣故諸法生也。后經即彼第十一卷中文。初句牒說。次二句亦有無雙絕。后句明說即無說。二經義同。非轉而轉。三百餘會不捨穿針。轉而不轉。四十九年不說一字。豈謂舌覆三千即成有說。身默丈室便謂無談。
此乃眾經之微言也 雖引二經義同眾典故。云眾經等。
何者。謂物無耶。則邪見非惑。謂物有耶。則常見為得 文通二對反核以明。皆上句明著下句核破。邪見斷見也。若計物是無。外道斷見應非是惑。下對例知。物雖通諸且目法輪。
以物非無故。邪見為惑。以物非有故。常見不得 順顯可知。
然則非有非無者。信真諦之談也 真諦第一也。以說法非有非無。方是真諦之轉也。
故道行雲。心亦不有亦不無 即彼經初品中文。心為諸法之本。然通真妄。真謂如來藏心亦非有無。如無名論引釋。妄即妄想識心。從緣生者亦非有無。此中
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 也是唯一的。古人說：『二諦並非是雙重的，它們總是相悖，從未各自獨立存在。』
所以寶積童子讚歎說：『說法既非有，亦非無，因緣和合故，諸法才生起。』《瓔珞經》說：『轉法輪者，亦非是有轉，亦非是無轉，這才是所謂的轉無所轉。』這裡連續引用兩部經，依據言說的表相，來彰顯中道。第一段引文出自《維摩詰經》，是長者子寶積讚歎佛的偈頌。首句讚歎如來說法，與實相相應，因此有說和無說都是雙重超越的。后一句的意思是說，既然有和無都已超越，為何還要顯現一切言說？回答是：因為俗諦因緣的緣故，諸法才得以生起。后一段引文出自《瓔珞經》第十一卷。首句是提綱挈領的說法，接下來的兩句也是有和無的雙重超越，最後一句說明說即是無說。兩部經的意義相同，非轉而轉，三百多次法會不捨穿針之勞；轉而不轉，四十九年不說一字。難道說舌頭覆蓋三千大千世界就成了有說，身體默默地待在丈室之中就成了無談嗎？
這實在是眾多經典中的精微之言啊！雖然只引用了兩部經，但其意義與眾多經典相同，所以說是『眾經』等。
為什麼這樣說呢？如果認為事物是『無』，那麼邪見（斷見）就不是迷惑；如果認為事物是『有』，那麼常見就成了正確的見解。這裡運用兩組對立的反問來闡明道理，都是上句提出觀點，下句進行駁斥。邪見指的是斷見。如果認為事物是『無』，那麼外道的斷見就不應該是一種迷惑。根據下文的例子可以知道，這裡的事物雖然可以泛指一切事物，但主要指的是法輪。
因為事物並非是『無』，所以邪見才是一種迷惑；因為事物並非是『有』，所以常見才不能成立。這是順著文意來顯明道理，容易理解。
如此說來，非有非無，才是信奉真諦的言論啊！真諦是第一義諦。因為說法既非有也非無，才是真諦的運轉。
所以《道行般若經》說：『心亦非有亦非無。』出自該經的初品。心是諸法的根本，然而心既包含真也包含妄。真指的是如來藏心，它既非有也非無，正如《無名論》所解釋的那樣。妄指的是妄想識心，從因緣而生者，也非有非無。這裡...
【English Translation】 English version It is also one. The ancients said, 'The two truths are not dual; they are always contradictory and have never existed independently.'
Therefore, the youth Baoji (Ratnakara) exclaimed, 'The Dharma spoken is neither existent nor nonexistent; due to causes and conditions, all dharmas arise.' The Yingluo Jing (The Garland Sutra) says, 'One who turns the Dharma wheel neither turns with existence nor turns with non-existence; this is called turning without turning.' Here, two sutras are quoted consecutively, based on the appearance of speech, to reveal the Middle Way. The first quote is from the Vimalakirti Sutra, a verse in praise of the Buddha by the son of the elder, Baoji (Ratnakara). The first line praises the Tathagata's (如來) Dharma teaching, which corresponds to the true reality, so both existence and non-existence are doubly transcended. The meaning of the second line is that since existence and non-existence have been transcended, why manifest all speech? The answer is that due to the causes and conditions of conventional truth (俗諦), all dharmas arise. The second quote is from the eleventh chapter of the Yingluo Jing (The Garland Sutra). The first line is a summary statement, and the next two lines also doubly transcend existence and non-existence. The last line explains that speaking is the same as not speaking. The meanings of the two sutras are the same: turning without turning, not abandoning the labor of threading a needle in over three hundred assemblies; turning without turning, not speaking a single word for forty-nine years. Does covering the three thousand great thousand worlds with the tongue constitute speaking, or does remaining silently in the chamber constitute not speaking?
These are truly the subtle words of many sutras! Although only two sutras are quoted, their meaning is the same as that of many sutras, so it is said 'many sutras,' etc.
Why is this so? If one considers things to be 'non-existent,' then wrong views (邪見) (nihilistic views) would not be delusions; if one considers things to be 'existent,' then eternalism (常見) would be correct. Here, two sets of opposing questions are used to clarify the principle, with the first sentence presenting a viewpoint and the second sentence refuting it. Wrong views (邪見) refer to nihilistic views (斷見). If one considers things to be 'non-existent,' then the nihilistic views of externalists should not be a delusion. Based on the example below, it can be known that although things can refer to all things, they mainly refer to the Dharma wheel (法輪).
Because things are not 'non-existent,' wrong views (邪見) are delusions; because things are not 'existent,' eternalism (常見) cannot be established. This is explaining the principle in accordance with the text, which is easy to understand.
Therefore, neither existence nor non-existence is the talk of believing in the true truth (真諦)! The true truth (真諦) is the first principle. Because the Dharma spoken is neither existent nor non-existent, it is the turning of the true truth (真諦).
Therefore, the Daoxing Prajna Sutra says, 'The mind is neither existent nor non-existent.' This is from the first chapter of that sutra. The mind is the root of all dharmas, but the mind includes both truth and delusion. Truth refers to the Tathagatagarbha (如來藏) mind, which is neither existent nor non-existent, as explained in the Wuming Lun (Treatise of No Name). Delusion refers to the mind of deluded consciousness, which arises from causes and conditions and is also neither existent nor non-existent. Here...
辯之。以經義含有二法故不可局。
故中觀云。物從因緣故不有。緣起故不無 義引中論亦轉釋前經也。從緣不有謂真也。緣起不無謂俗也。
尋理即其然矣 推尋論旨法非有無。實乃如是。此以教如繩正理亦衡直。
所以然者。夫有若真有。有自常有。豈待緣而後有哉。譬彼真無。無自常無。豈待緣而後無 初句含二意。一徴辭。二牒不有等。反推諸法正顯從緣。謂法若實有。緣前亦合有。不待緣集然後方有。后三句例明真無二說。一太虛。二真空。此二元空不待緣離然後空也。異喻顯法理亦極成。
若有不能自有。待緣而後有者。故知有非真有。有非真有。雖有不可謂之有矣 初二句順牒前文。明法待緣非真。后二句相躡以顯非有也。
不無者。夫無則湛然不動可謂之無。萬物若無則不應起。起則非無。以明緣起故不無也 初句牒論。次二句舉例。以示如前二空皆凝湛不動。可謂者。堪可許其是無。次二句承例反明。次一句順顯。后二句成前不無也。
故摩訶衍論云。一切諸法一切因緣故應有。一切諸法一切因緣故不應有。一切無法一切因緣故應有。一切有法一切因緣故不應有 大論前後有斯義而無斯文。通成二對。初對中明法從緣故不有不無。初句緣起故不無。后句從緣
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 辯駁這種觀點。因為經文的意義包含有二法，所以不能侷限於一種解釋。 因此，《中觀論》說：『事物從因緣而生，所以不是實有；因為緣起，所以不是實無。』這裡引用《中論》的意義，也是爲了進一步解釋前面的經文。從因緣而生不是實有，指的是真諦（Paramārtha）；因為緣起不是實無，指的是世俗諦（Saṃvṛti）。 探究其中的道理，確實是這樣。推究《中論》的宗旨，法既不是有也不是無，實際上就是這樣。這是用佛經的教義如同繩墨一樣端正，用正理來衡量也是筆直的。 為什麼是這樣呢？如果『有』是真實的有，那麼『有』就應該是本來就有的，怎麼會等待因緣才能產生呢？譬如真正的『無』，『無』就應該是本來就無的，怎麼會等待因緣才能成為『無』呢？第一句包含兩層意思：一是提出疑問，二是呼應『不是實有』等觀點。反過來推論諸法，正是爲了顯明諸法是從因緣而生的。意思是說，如果法是實有的，那麼在因緣聚合之前也應該是有的，不應該等待因緣聚合之後才產生。後面的三句用類比的方式來說明真無的兩種說法：一是太虛（空曠的虛空），二是真空（沒有任何實體存在的空）。這兩種空本來就是空，不需要等待因緣離散之後才成為空。用不同的比喻來顯明佛法的道理，也是極其明確的。 如果『有』不能自己產生，而是要等待因緣才能產生，那麼就知道『有』不是真實的有。『有』不是真實的有，即使存在，也不能稱之為『有』。前兩句順著前面的文意，說明法要依賴因緣，不是真實的。后兩句緊接著前面的話，來顯示『非有』的道理。 『不是無』的意思是，『無』應該是湛然不動，才可以稱之為『無』。萬物如果是『無』，就不應該生起。如果生起了，就不是『無』。這是爲了說明緣起，所以不是『無』。第一句呼應《中論》的觀點。接下來的兩句舉例說明，就像前面的太虛和真空，都是凝定不動的，可以稱之為『無』。接下來的兩句承接前面的例子，反過來闡明道理。最後一句順著前面的意思來顯明，最後兩句是爲了成就前面的『不是無』的觀點。 所以《摩訶衍論》（Mahāyāna-sūtra）說：『一切諸法因為一切因緣的緣故，應該說是有；一切諸法因為一切因緣的緣故，應該說不是有；一切無法因為一切因緣的緣故，應該說是有；一切有法因為一切因緣的緣故，應該說不是有。』《大論》前後有這樣的意義，但是沒有這樣的文字。總共構成兩對。第一對中說明法從因緣而生，所以不是實有也不是實無。第一句是緣起所以不是實無，后一句是從緣所以不是實有。
【English Translation】 English version: Refute this view. Because the meaning of the scriptures contains two truths, it cannot be limited to one interpretation. Therefore, the Madhyamaka-karika (Treatise on the Middle Way) says: 'Things arise from causes and conditions, therefore they are not truly existent; because of dependent origination, they are not truly non-existent.' This quotes the meaning of the Madhyamaka-karika to further explain the previous scriptures. 'Arising from causes and conditions is not truly existent' refers to the ultimate truth (Paramārtha); 'because of dependent origination, it is not truly non-existent' refers to the conventional truth (Saṃvṛti). Investigating the reason behind it, it is indeed so. Examining the purpose of the Madhyamaka-karika, the Dharma is neither existent nor non-existent, but actually like this. This uses the teachings of the Buddhist scriptures as straight as a plumb line, and using correct reasoning to measure it is also straight. Why is it like this? If 'existence' were truly existent, then 'existence' should be inherently existent. How could it wait for causes and conditions to arise? For example, true 'non-existence' should be inherently non-existent. How could it wait for causes and conditions to become 'non-existent'? The first sentence contains two meanings: first, it raises a question; second, it echoes the views of 'not truly existent,' etc. Reversely inferring all dharmas is precisely to reveal that all dharmas arise from causes and conditions. It means that if a dharma were truly existent, then it should also exist before the aggregation of causes and conditions, and should not arise only after the aggregation of causes and conditions. The following three sentences use analogy to illustrate the two explanations of true non-existence: one is the great void (vast emptiness), and the other is true emptiness (emptiness without any substantial existence). These two emptinesses are inherently empty and do not need to wait for the dispersion of causes and conditions to become empty. Using different metaphors to reveal the principles of the Dharma is also extremely clear. If 'existence' cannot arise on its own but must wait for causes and conditions to arise, then it is known that 'existence' is not truly existent. 'Existence' is not truly existent; even if it exists, it cannot be called 'existence.' The first two sentences follow the previous text, explaining that the Dharma depends on causes and conditions and is not true. The latter two sentences follow the previous words to show the principle of 'non-existence'. 'Not non-existent' means that 'non-existence' should be still and unmoving, and can be called 'non-existence.' If all things were 'non-existent,' they should not arise. If they arise, they are not 'non-existent.' This is to explain dependent origination, so it is not 'non-existent.' The first sentence echoes the view of the Madhyamaka-karika. The next two sentences give examples to illustrate that, like the previous great void and true emptiness, they are both still and unmoving and can be called 'non-existent.' The next two sentences follow the previous examples and explain the principle in reverse. The last sentence follows the previous meaning to reveal that the last two sentences are to achieve the previous view of 'not non-existent'. Therefore, the Mahāyāna-sūtra says: 'All dharmas should be said to exist because of all causes and conditions; all dharmas should be said not to exist because of all causes and conditions; all non-existent dharmas should be said to exist because of all causes and conditions; all existent dharmas should be said not to exist because of all causes and conditions.' The Mahāyāna-sūtra has such meaning before and after, but does not have such words. It forms two pairs in total. The first pair explains that dharmas arise from causes and conditions, so they are neither truly existent nor truly non-existent. The first sentence is that dependent origination is not truly non-existent, and the latter sentence is that arising from causes and conditions is not truly existent.
故不有。后對約有無二法。對辨以明不有不無。一切無法等者。大論三十一。以過未法為無。現在法為有。涅槃三十四云。一切世間有四種無。一未生名無。二滅已名無。三各異互無。四畢竟名無。皆因緣有此四無。后句可知。皆云一切等者。法乃萬殊緣亦無數。
尋此有無之言。豈直反論而已哉。若應有即是有。不應言無。若應無即是無。不應言有 初句收前四句。以前論不出有無故。次句反謂相反。猶云豈但是有無相反之說耶。后通有六句。出論中有無相反之相。前三句中若應有者。收前初三二句。即是有者。定應唯有。不應言無者。收前二四兩句。如何卻言無耶。后三句中。若應無者。收前二四兩句。即是無者。定應唯無。不應言有者。收前初三兩句。如何卻言有耶。已上辯定相反。下顯緣法有無皆具。謂若有若無俱有其理。非相反也。
言有是為假。有以明非無。借無以辯非有。此事一稱二。其文有似不同。茍領其所同。則無異而不同 初二句論云應有。明緣起故假有也。次一句論云不應有。明從緣故非有也。事一下緣生事一有無名二。四句之文似乖。若解其不有不無之同。豈有無之異能違。
然則萬法果有其所以不有。不可得而有。有其所以不無。不可得而無 義承前起。故云然則。前
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：因此說『不有』。後面針對『有』和『無』這兩種法。通過對『有』和『無』的辨析，來闡明『不有』和『不無』的道理。《大智度論》第三十一卷中說，過去和未來的法是『無』，現在的法是『有』。《涅槃經》第三十四卷中說，一切世間有四種『無』：一是未生名為『無』，二是滅已名為『無』，三是各異互為『無』，四是畢竟名為『無』。這四種『無』都是因緣而有。後面的句子可以理解。都說『一切』等等，是因為法有萬種不同，因緣也有無數。
探尋這『有』和『無』的說法，難道僅僅是相反的論述嗎？如果應該是有，那就是有，不應該說是無。如果應該是無，那就是無，不應該說是有。第一句總括了前面的四句，因為前面的論述沒有超出『有』和『無』的範圍。第二句是反駁，意思是難道僅僅是有無相反的說法嗎？後面貫通了六句，闡述了論中有無相反的相狀。前三句中，『如果應該是有』，總括了前面第一、三、二句，『即是有』，確定應該是唯有，『不應該說是無』，總括了前面第二、四兩句，為什麼反而說是無呢？后三句中，『如果應該是無』，總括了前面第二、四兩句，『即是無』，確定應該是唯無，『不應該說是有』，總括了前面第一、三兩句，為什麼反而說是有呢？以上辨析確定了相反的說法，下面闡明緣法有無都具備，意思是說，無論是『有』還是『無』，都有其道理，並非相反。
說『有』是假有，用『有』來表明並非『無』，借用『無』來辨析並非『有』。這件事一個名稱兩種含義。這些文字表面上似乎不同，如果領會了它們所共同之處，就沒有不同而不同了。最初兩句論述說『應有』，闡明因為緣起所以是假有。下一句論述說『不應有』，闡明因為是從緣而生，所以並非實有。一件事，因為緣生，一個事物具有『有』和『無』兩種名稱。這四句文字表面上似乎矛盾，如果理解了它們『不有』『不無』的相同之處，那麼『有』和『無』的差異又怎麼能違背這個共同點呢？
既然如此，那麼萬法確實有其所以『不有』的原因，所以不可執著于『有』；也有其所以『不無』的原因，所以不可執著于『無』。意義承接前面而起，所以說『然則』。前面...
【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, it is said 'not-being'. Later, it addresses the two dharmas of 'being' and 'non-being'. Through the differentiation of 'being' and 'non-being', it clarifies the principles of 'not-being' and 'not-non-being'. The Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra (大論) (Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom) in its thirty-first fascicle, states that the past and future dharmas are 'non-being', while the present dharma is 'being'. The Nirvana Sutra (涅槃) (Nirvana Sutra) in its thirty-fourth fascicle, states that all the world has four kinds of 'non-being': first, not yet born is called 'non-being'; second, already extinguished is called 'non-being'; third, each different is mutually 'non-being'; fourth, ultimately is called 'non-being'. All these four 'non-beings' exist due to conditions. The later sentence can be understood. All say 'all' etc., because the dharmas are of myriad differences and the conditions are also countless.
Exploring these words of 'being' and 'non-being', are they merely contradictory arguments? If it should be 'being', then it is 'being', and should not be said to be 'non-being'. If it should be 'non-being', then it is 'non-being', and should not be said to be 'being'. The first sentence summarizes the previous four sentences, because the previous discussion did not go beyond the scope of 'being' and 'non-being'. The second sentence is a rebuttal, meaning is it merely a contradictory statement of being and non-being? The following connects six sentences, explaining the appearance of being and non-being contradicting each other in the discussion. In the first three sentences, 'if it should be being', it summarizes the previous first, third, and second sentences, 'then it is being', it is determined that it should only be being, 'should not be said to be non-being', it summarizes the previous second and fourth sentences, why then say it is non-being? In the latter three sentences, 'if it should be non-being', it summarizes the previous second and fourth sentences, 'then it is non-being', it is determined that it should only be non-being, 'should not be said to be being', it summarizes the previous first and third sentences, why then say it is being? The above analysis determines the contradictory statements, below it clarifies that conditioned dharmas both possess being and non-being, meaning that whether it is 'being' or 'non-being', both have their reasons, and are not contradictory.
Saying 'being' is provisional being, using 'being' to clarify that it is not 'non-being', borrowing 'non-being' to differentiate that it is not 'being'. This matter has one name with two meanings. The words of the four sentences seem contradictory. If one understands their commonality of 'not-being' and 'not-non-being', then how can the difference between 'being' and 'non-being' violate this common point? The first two sentences discuss 'should be being', clarifying that because of conditioned arising, it is provisional being. The next sentence discusses 'should not be being', clarifying that because it arises from conditions, it is not substantial being. One matter, because of conditioned arising, one thing has two names of 'being' and 'non-being'. The words of these four sentences seem contradictory on the surface, if one understands the sameness of their 'not-being' and 'not-non-being', then how can the difference between 'being' and 'non-being' violate this common point?
Since this is the case, then all dharmas indeed have their reason for 'not-being', so one cannot be attached to 'being'; they also have their reason for 'not-non-being', so one cannot be attached to 'non-being'. The meaning follows from the previous, so it says 'since this is the case'. The previous...
約二諦已出此文。展轉引釋至此義周。故復舉此以結。不可等者。物性本空孰能強之令有。緣起既形。孰能排之令無。
何則欲言其有有非真生。欲言其無事象既形。象形不即無。非真非實有。然則不真空義顯于茲矣 初有四句。明於諸法不可定執是有是無。皆上句舉執。下句推破。欲謂將欲。言謂意言。將謂諸法定有。邪有非實生。但假緣故如何定有。欲待謂無事像已起。如何定無。次有二句。初句躡前緣起之事。次句結成即假即空。非真假有也。非實真空也。後有二句。正結論名。首建此名以標宗致。逐節引教。隨教會釋。顯理已週中道實相可令悟入。最後結歸不出題示。故云爾也。問論周至此後說何為。答前已通敘其意可了。義若未盡何此結之。可細推繹。
故放光云。諸法假號不真。譬如幻化人。非無幻化人。幻化人非真人也 彼經二十七云。佛告須菩提。名字者不真。假號為名。引此之意已見前文。初法說謂諸法不真。名亦假也。后三句喻明。于中初句經文。次二句義釋也。謂幻成一人似非無也。似豈為真。故云非真。
夫以名求物。物無當名之實。以物求名。名無得物之功。物無當名之實非物也。名無得物之功非名也 此與論初大旨無殊。文小變爾。名自情生好惡何定。或於一物立多
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 以上文段已經通過二諦（世俗諦和勝義諦）闡述完畢。輾轉引用解釋，至此意義完備，所以再次舉出這些內容來作總結。『不可等』的意思是，事物的本性是空性的，誰能強迫它變成實有呢？緣起已經形成，誰又能排斥它使之消失呢？ 為什麼這麼說呢？如果想說它是『有』，那麼這個『有』並非真實的生起；如果想說它是『無』，那麼事物的現象已經顯現。現象的顯現並不等同於『無』，也不是真實存在的『有』。這樣看來，不真空的意義就在這裡顯現了。』最初的四句，說明對於諸法，不可執著地認為是『有』或者『無』。都是上句提出執著，下句進行破斥。『欲言』是指將要說，『言』是指意念上的表達。將要說諸法是確定的『有』，這種『有』並非真實的生起，只是憑藉因緣和合而生，怎麼能確定它是『有』呢？將要說它是『無』，但是事物的現象已經生起，又怎麼能確定它是『無』呢？接下來的兩句，第一句承接前面的緣起之事，第二句總結成即假即空。不是真實的假有，也不是實在的真空。最後的兩句，正式結論並點明名稱。首先建立這個名稱來標明宗旨，逐節引用教義，隨著教義進行解釋，顯現的道理已經完備，中道實相可以使人領悟並進入。最後總結歸納，沒有超出題目的提示，所以這樣說。有人會問，論述周全到這裡，後面還說什麼呢？回答是，前面已經通盤敘述了它的意思，可以理解了。如果意義沒有窮盡，為什麼要在這裡作總結呢？可以仔細推敲。 所以《放光經》說：『諸法是假名安立，不是真實的。譬如幻化出來的人，並非沒有幻化人，但幻化人不是真人。』《彼經》第二十七品說：『佛告訴須菩提，名字是不真實的，只是假名安立。』引用這些話的意思已經在前面的文章中說明。最初的法說是指諸法不真實，名字也是虛假的。後面的三句是比喻說明。其中第一句是經文，後面的兩句是義理的解釋。意思是幻化成一個人，看起來好像不是沒有，但看起來像，難道就是真的嗎？所以說不是真的。 用名稱去尋求事物，事物沒有符合名稱的實際；用事物去尋求名稱，名稱沒有獲得事物的功用。事物沒有符合名稱的實際，就不是事物；名稱沒有獲得事物的功用，就不是名稱。』這和《論》最初的大旨沒有區別，只是文字上稍微變化而已。名稱從情識產生，好壞有什麼定準呢？或者對於一個事物，安立多個名稱。
【English Translation】 English version: The above passage has been explained through the two truths (conventional truth and ultimate truth). After repeated citations and explanations, the meaning is now complete, so these contents are brought up again for conclusion. 'Cannot be equated' means that the nature of things is emptiness, who can force it to become real existence? Since dependent origination has already formed, who can reject it and make it disappear? Why is this said? If you want to say it 'exists', then this 'existence' is not a real arising; if you want to say it is 'non-existent', then the phenomena of things have already appeared. The appearance of phenomena is not the same as 'non-existence', nor is it a truly existing 'existence'. In this way, the meaning of not-empty emptiness is revealed here. The initial four sentences explain that for all dharmas (phenomena), one should not stubbornly believe that they 'exist' or 'do not exist'. The upper sentence presents the attachment, and the lower sentence refutes it. 'Wanting to say' refers to intending to say, 'saying' refers to mental expression. Wanting to say that all dharmas are definitely 'existent', this 'existence' is not a real arising, but arises only by relying on conditions, how can it be determined that it 'exists'? Wanting to say that it is 'non-existent', but the phenomena of things have already arisen, how can it be determined that it is 'non-existent'? The following two sentences, the first sentence connects with the previous event of dependent origination, and the second sentence concludes that it is both provisionally existent and empty. It is not a real provisional existence, nor is it a substantial emptiness. The last two sentences formally conclude and point out the name. First, establish this name to indicate the purpose, cite the teachings section by section, and explain according to the teachings. The revealed principle is already complete, and the Middle Way reality can enable people to understand and enter. The final summary does not go beyond the prompt of the topic, so it is said like this. Someone may ask, if the discussion is so complete here, what else is there to say later? The answer is that the meaning has already been comprehensively narrated earlier, and it can be understood. If the meaning is not exhausted, why conclude it here? It can be carefully pondered. Therefore, the Fang Guang Jing (放光經, Sutra of Releasing Light) says: 'All dharmas are established by false names, they are not real. For example, a person transformed by illusion, it is not that there is no illusory person, but the illusory person is not a real person.' Chapter 27 of Bi Jing (彼經, That Sutra) says: 'The Buddha told Subhuti (須菩提, one of the ten principal disciples of the Buddha) that names are not real, they are only established as false names.' The meaning of quoting these words has already been explained in the previous article. The initial Dharma saying refers to the fact that all dharmas are not real, and names are also false. The following three sentences are metaphorical explanations. Among them, the first sentence is the sutra text, and the following two sentences are explanations of the meaning. It means that a person transformed by illusion seems not to be non-existent, but seeming like it, is it really real? So it is said that it is not real. Using names to seek things, things do not have the reality that matches the name; using things to seek names, names do not have the function of obtaining things. Things do not have the reality that matches the name, so they are not things; names do not have the function of obtaining things, so they are not names.' This is no different from the original purpose of the Treatise, only the wording is slightly changed. Names arise from emotions, what fixed standard is there for good or bad? Or for one thing, establish multiple names.
名。或以一名召多物。物雖應名。亦無當名之實理。如以地龍木賊等名藥也。又名雖召物。亦無得物之實功。如談水濡唇言穢不涴口。應知名是假號物為幻化。但順世俗不入實相。
是以名不當實。實不當名。名實無當。萬物安在 一切諸法不出名相。此二既空萬物不立。已上名相境寂。下辯妄想心虛。
故中觀云。物無彼此。而人以此為此。以彼為彼。彼亦以此為彼。以彼為此 初句論文。彼論第四云。諸法實相無有此彼。而人下釋也。如二人相向彼此互執也。
此彼莫定乎一名。而惑者懷必然之志。然則彼此初非有。惑者初非無 正舉妄計也。彼此互指既無定在。柰何惑者必然而執我定名此。他定名彼。妄想之心。依然取著。然則下名相元空迷夫妄執。亦可名相無暫始有。妄想無暫始無。以無暫始無之妄情。執無暫始有之名相。病眼花生病耳蟬鳴。蟬花恒無病根常執。
既悟彼此之非有。有何物而可有(執)哉。故知萬物非真假號久矣 初句遍計性空。次句名隨相遣翳差花亡。耳聰蟬喪。后二句結成經義。此中雖帶名相而言。意顯妄執本空。況后引成具等。又唯約妄情說邪。
是以成具立強名之文。園林托指馬之況 成具經云。是法無所有強為其名。園林即漆園也。曹州地名。莊
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：名稱。或者用一個名稱來稱呼多種事物。事物雖然應和名稱，卻沒有符合名稱的實際道理。例如用地龍、木賊等名稱來稱呼藥物。又名稱雖然可以用來稱呼事物，卻沒有得到事物的實際功用。如同談論水不能濕潤嘴唇，說污穢的言語不會玷污口。應當知道名稱是虛假的符號，事物是虛幻變化的。只是順應世俗，不進入實相。
因此，名稱不符合實際，實際不符合名稱。名稱和實際不相符，萬物在哪裡呢？一切諸法都離不開名稱和相狀。這兩者既然是空，萬物就不能成立。以上是名稱和相狀的境界寂滅。下面辨析妄想的心是虛假的。
所以《中觀論》說：『事物沒有彼此的區分，而人們以這個為這個，以那個為那個。那個也以這個為那個，以那個為這個。』第一句是論文，彼論第四說：『諸法的實相沒有此和彼的區分。』而『人們』以下是解釋。如同兩個人相對而立，彼此互相執著。
此和彼不能在一個名稱上確定，而迷惑的人卻懷有必然的意志。既然如此，那麼彼此最初並非存在，迷惑的人最初並非不存在。』這是正舉妄計。彼此互相指認既然沒有確定的所在，為什麼迷惑的人一定要執著於我確定地稱這個為『此』，他人確定地稱那個為『彼』呢？妄想的心，依然取著。既然如此，那麼名相本來是空，迷惑的人妄自執著。也可以說名相沒有暫時的開始而有，妄想沒有暫時的開始而無。以沒有暫時的開始而無的妄情，執著于沒有暫時的開始而有的名相。就像病眼看見空花，病耳聽到蟬鳴。蟬和花本來就沒有，病根卻常常執著。
既然領悟到彼此並非真實存在，還有什麼事物可以執著呢？所以知道萬物並非真實，只是虛假的名稱很久了。』第一句說的是遍計所執性是空。第二句說的是名稱隨著相狀而消失，就像眼翳消失，空花消亡；耳朵聰敏，蟬鳴消失。后兩句總結經義。這裡雖然帶著名相來說，意思是顯示妄執本來是空。何況後面引用的成具等，又只是就妄情來說。
因此有『成具』設立強名的文字，園林寄託指馬的比況。』《成具經》說：『這個法本來什麼都沒有，強行為它取個名字。』園林就是漆園，曹州的地名。莊
【English Translation】 English version: Name. Or using one name to call many things. Although things correspond to the name, there is no actual principle that matches the name. For example, using names such as Dilong (earthworm) and Muzei (scouring rush) to refer to medicines. Also, although the name can be used to call things, there is no actual function of obtaining the thing. It's like talking about water not wetting the lips, and saying dirty words not defiling the mouth. It should be known that names are false symbols, and things are illusory transformations. It just follows the customs of the world and does not enter the true reality (Skt. satya).
Therefore, the name does not match the reality, and the reality does not match the name. When the name and reality do not match, where are all things? All dharmas cannot be separated from names and forms (Skt. nāma-rūpa). Since these two are empty, all things cannot be established. The above is the silence of the realm of names and forms. The following analyzes that the mind of delusion is false.
Therefore, the Madhyamaka (Middle Way) says: 'Things have no distinction between this and that, but people take this as this and that as that. That also takes this as that and that as this.' The first sentence is a thesis, and the fourth thesis says: 'The true nature of all dharmas has no distinction between this and that.' And 'people' below is an explanation. It's like two people standing face to face, each clinging to each other.
'This and that cannot be determined by one name, but the confused cherish the will of certainty. Since this is the case, then this and that were not originally there, and the confused were not originally absent.' This is the correct example of false calculation. Since the mutual designation of this and that has no fixed place, why must the confused cling to my definite name for this and his definite name for that? The mind of delusion still clings. Since this is the case, then names and forms are originally empty, and the confused cling to them falsely. It can also be said that names and forms do not have a temporary beginning and exist, and delusions do not have a temporary beginning and do not exist. With the delusion that has no temporary beginning and does not exist, cling to the names and forms that have no temporary beginning and exist. It's like a diseased eye seeing empty flowers, and a diseased ear hearing cicadas chirping. Cicadas and flowers are originally not there, but the root of the disease often clings.
Since you have realized that this and that are not real, what things can you cling to? Therefore, it has long been known that all things are not real, but only false names.' The first sentence says that the nature of pervasive discrimination is empty. The second sentence says that the name disappears with the form, just like the eye disease disappears, and the empty flower disappears; the ears are clear, and the cicada chirping disappears. The last two sentences conclude the meaning of the sutra. Although it is said here with names and forms, the meaning is to show that delusions are originally empty. Moreover, the Chengju (Tattvasiddhi Shastra) and others quoted later are only about delusions.
Therefore, there is the text of 'Chengju' establishing strong names, and the garden entrusts the analogy of pointing to a horse. 'The Chengju Sutra says: 'This dharma has nothing at all, and a name is forcibly given to it.' The garden is Qiyuan (Lacquer Garden), the name of a place in Caozhou. Zhuang
周曾為此吏。故以目之。彼齊物云。以指喻指之非指。不若以非指喻指之非指也。以馬喻馬之非馬。不若以非馬喻馬之非馬也。指謂手指。馬謂戲籌。若今雙六之馬也。如二人相向各以己指是指。他指非指。是非互在本無實也。喻曉也。馬可例之。
如此則深遠之言。於何而不在(具) 通指上文。內教妄想元空。外典是非無主。文亦備在。
是以聖人乘千化而不變。履萬惑而常通者。以其即萬物之自虛。不假虛而虛物也 初句舉能證之聖。令物則之。次二句顯證悟之相。千化名相萬物也。不變者。即名相而如如故。惑妄想也。常通者。即妄想而正智故以其下出即真所以。可知。
故經云。甚奇世尊。不動真際為諸法立處。非離真而立處。立處即真也 初引經。即同放光不動等覺建立諸法。非離下論主釋經義也。謂依理成事。事豈離真而立也。
然則道遠乎哉。觸事而真。聖遠乎哉。體之即神 初二句明境。初句舉體而核。道謂如如。下句指屬觸謂六觸。事即名相。事相既近。體虛即真。真豈太遠。后二句明心。亦初句舉聖而核。聖即智也。下句屬體。謂體究神心也。即神者。即我之心為神聖矣。豈太遠乎。仁王經云。菩薩未成佛。以菩提為煩惱。菩薩成佛時。以煩惱為菩提。今詳論意。自
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 周曾擔任過這個官職，所以用『目』來稱呼他。就像《齊物論》里說的：用手指來比喻手指不是指，不如用『非指』來比喻手指不是指；用馬來比喻馬不是馬，不如用『非馬』來比喻馬不是馬。『指』指的是手指，『馬』指的是遊戲用的籌碼，就像現在雙陸棋中的馬一樣。如果兩個人面對面，各自用自己的手指指著對方，那麼對方的手指就不是『指』了。『是』和『非』相互依存，本來就沒有實在的意義。『喻』是曉喻的意思。『馬』可以類比理解。
如此說來，那麼深遠的道理，有什麼不在其中呢？（都）普遍指代上文。內教認為妄想本源是空，外典認為是非沒有主宰。這些道理也都完備地包含在其中。
因此，聖人經歷千變萬化而不改變，身處萬般迷惑而常能通達，是因為他們直接認識到萬物本性是空虛的，而不是藉助虛無來使萬物空虛。第一句是舉出能夠證悟的聖人，讓萬物傚法。接下來的兩句是顯示證悟后的狀態。『千化』指的是各種名相和萬物。『不變』指的是，即使面對各種名相，也能如如不動。『惑』指的是妄想。『常通』指的是，即使面對妄想，也能保持正智。『以其』以下是說明直接認識真如的原因，由此可知。
所以經書上說：『非常奇妙啊，世尊！在不動搖真如實際的情況下，為諸法建立處所。』不是離開真如而建立處所，建立處所就是真如。』開頭是引用經文，與《放光經》中『不動等覺建立諸法』相同。『非離』以下是論主的解釋。意思是說，依據真理成就事物，事物怎麼能離開真如而存在呢？
那麼，道還遙遠嗎？接觸事物就能領悟真如。聖人還遙遠嗎？體會它就能達到神妙的境界。』開頭兩句是說明境界。第一句是舉出本體來考察，『道』指的是如如。下一句是具體指明，『觸』指的是六觸，『事』指的是名相。事相既然如此接近，本體空虛就是真如，真如又怎麼會太遙遠呢？后兩句是說明心境。也是第一句舉出聖人來考察，『聖』指的是智慧。下一句是具體指明體會。體會神妙的心境。達到神妙的境界，就是把我的心當作神聖的心了，又怎麼會太遙遠呢？《仁王經》上說：『菩薩未成佛時，以菩提為煩惱；菩薩成佛時，以煩惱為菩提。』現在詳細考察論主的意圖，自然...
【English Translation】 English version: Zhou once held this position, hence the reference to him as 『Mu』 (目). It's like what's said in the 『齊物論』 (Qiwu Lun, Discussion on Seeing All Things as Equal): 『Using a finger to illustrate that a finger is not the finger is not as good as using a 『non-finger』 to illustrate that a finger is not the finger; using a horse to illustrate that a horse is not the horse is not as good as using a 『non-horse』 to illustrate that a horse is not the horse.』 『指』 (zhi, finger) refers to the finger, 『馬』 (ma, horse) refers to the game pieces, like the horses in today's 雙陸 (Shuanglu, backgammon). If two people face each other and each points at the other with their finger, then the other's finger is not 『指』 (zhi, finger). 『是』 (shi, right) and 『非』 (fei, wrong) are interdependent and have no real meaning in themselves. 『喻』 (yu, metaphor) means to make clear. The 『馬』 (ma, horse) can be understood analogously.
If that's the case, then what profound truth isn't contained within it? (具, ju, all) Universally refers to the preceding text. The inner teachings consider delusion to be fundamentally empty, and the outer teachings consider right and wrong to have no master. These principles are also completely contained within it.
Therefore, the sage experiences thousands of transformations without changing, and navigates through myriad delusions while remaining constantly enlightened, because they directly recognize that the nature of all things is emptiness, rather than using emptiness to make things empty. The first sentence cites the sage who can attain enlightenment, so that all things may emulate them. The next two sentences reveal the state of enlightenment. 『千化』 (qian hua, thousands of transformations) refers to all kinds of names and forms and all things. 『不變』 (bu bian, unchanging) means that even when facing various names and forms, one remains 如如 (ru ru, thus thus, suchness). 『惑』 (huo, delusion) refers to妄想 (wang xiang, delusion). 『常通』 (chang tong, constantly enlightened) means that even when facing delusion, one maintains 正智 (zheng zhi, right wisdom). 『以其』 (yi qi, because of) below explains the reason for directly recognizing 真如 (zhen ru, suchness), from which it can be known.
Therefore, the sutra says: 『How wondrous, 世尊 (Shi Zun, World Honored One)! Without moving from the 真際 (zhen ji, true reality), he establishes places for all dharmas.』 It is not establishing places apart from 真 (zhen, truth); establishing places is 真 (zhen, truth).』 The beginning is a quote from the sutra, which is the same as 『不動等覺建立諸法』 (bu dong deng jue jian li zhu fa, establishing all dharmas without moving from equal enlightenment) in the 《放光經》 (Fang Guang Jing, the Sutra of 放光般若, the Light Emission Prajna). 『非離』 (fei li, not apart from) below is the commentary by the commentator. It means that accomplishing things according to principle, how can things exist apart from 真 (zhen, truth)?
Then, is the 道 (dao, the Way) far away? Touching things is to realize 真 (zhen, truth). Are the sages far away? Experiencing it is to reach the realm of 神 (shen, spiritual).』 The first two sentences clarify the realm. The first sentence cites the substance for examination, 『道』 (dao, the Way) refers to 如如 (ru ru, suchness). The next sentence specifically points out that 『觸』 (chu, touch) refers to the six touches, and 『事』 (shi, things) refers to names and forms. Since the appearances of things are so close, the emptiness of the substance is 真 (zhen, truth), so how can 真 (zhen, truth) be too far away? The last two sentences clarify the state of mind. The first sentence also cites the sage for examination, 『聖』 (sheng, sage) refers to wisdom. The next sentence specifically points out the experience. Experiencing the spiritual state of mind is to regard my mind as a sacred mind, so how can it be too far away? The 《仁王經》 (Ren Wang Jing, the Sutra of Humane Kings) says: 『When a Bodhisattva has not yet become a Buddha, he regards Bodhi as煩惱 (fan nao, affliction); when a Bodhisattva becomes a Buddha, he regards煩惱 (fan nao, affliction) as菩提 (pu ti, Bodhi, enlightenment).』 Now, examining the commentator's intention in detail, naturally...
放光已下。乃密嚴楞伽五法相翻之義。故密嚴云。名從於相生。相從依他起。此二生分別。諸法性如如。於斯善觀察。是名為正智。名為遍計性。相是依他起。名相二俱遣。是為第一義。略解云。五法者。一名。二相。三妄想。四正智。五如如。此五約迷悟配之。謂迷時即如如。以成名相。即正智以成妄想。悟時翻名相為如如。翻妄想成正智。經中初三句如次名相妄想。次三句說正智。后一偈約三性顯如如也。略示如此。論意謂依彼名相顯示論旨。茍識相等體虛。不捨一論能詮之名所詮之義。即境而會如。即解而成智。故先舉聖人證法為式。然後示以即真之理。但在文甚隱致令難求。若前後冥搜義如指掌。
肇論新疏捲上 大正藏第 45 冊 No. 1860 肇論新疏
肇論新疏卷中
五臺大萬祐國寺開山住持釋源大白馬寺宗主贈邽國公海印開法大師長講沙門文才述
般若無知論第三 釋茲分二。初明般若。后解無知。初有二種。一本覺般若。即眾生等有智慧是也。大論四十三中翻為智慧。故華嚴出現說。一切眾生皆具如來智慧等。二始覺般若。即六度之一。然通淺深。淺則生空般若。深則法空般若。此復有二。一因修。謂歷位漸得故。二果證。謂覺至究竟故。然始本平等唯一覺也
。又有三種。一實相般若。大論指般若是一切諸法實相故。二觀照般若。照理照事故。三文字般若。能顯總持故。而此論中具攝前理。至文隨示。後言無知者。據下論文。總有二義。一揀妄。下云。本無惑取之知等。二顯真有三。一本覺離念。知即非知。故下云。果有無相之知等。二始覺無知。謂窮幽亡鑒撫會無慮故。實相觀照可以例知。三文字無知。謂言說即如文字性空非知非不知。仍曰無知。修文字者不著不離。是名修諸佛智母。應知甚深般若總持一切之功德。出生無盡之法門。破裂煩籠優遊正覺也。據梁傳。什公初譯大品。論主宗之以作此論。竟以呈什。什嘆曰。吾解不謝子。辭當相揖。論者。謂假文字般若。問答析理。顯示實相等。
夫般若虛玄者。蓋是三乘之宗極也 非知非見曰虛。不有不無曰玄。又四句不攝曰虛。靈鑒亡照曰玄。此牒經也。極至也。三乘之人皆宗尚于般若。各各修學。但機有小大成自乘菩提。故大品聞持品云。善男子欲得阿羅漢果。當習行般若波羅蜜等。
誠真一之無差。然異端之論紛然久矣 正理唯一至當不差。人學般若隨見成殊。各興異論。紛然亂轍久矣。
有天竺沙門鳩摩羅什者。少踐大方研(磨)機(心)斯趣(旨)獨拔(出)于言象之表。妙契于希夷之境
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 又有三種般若。一是實相般若（指般若是一切諸法的真實相狀）。二是觀照般若（用智慧觀照真理和事物）。三是文字般若（能顯現總持的功德）。而這部論中包含了前面的道理，根據文字的引導來顯示。後面說的『無知』，根據下面的論文，總共有兩種含義。一是排除虛妄，下面說：『本來沒有迷惑而取用的知等。』二是顯示真實，有三種：一是本覺離念，知就是非知，所以下面說：『果位有無相之知等。』二是始覺無知，意思是窮盡幽深，泯滅鑑照，撫慰會合，沒有思慮。實相和觀照可以類推得知。三是文字無知，意思是言說就是如，文字的自性是空，非知非不知，仍然說是無知。修習文字般若的人不執著也不遠離，這叫做修習諸佛智慧之母。應當知道甚深般若總持一切的功德，出生無盡的法門，破裂煩惱的牢籠，自由自在地達到正覺。根據梁代的記載，鳩摩羅什（Kumārajīva）最初翻譯《大品般若經》，論主依據它來寫作這部論，完成後呈給鳩摩羅什。鳩摩羅什讚歎說：『我的理解不比你差，文辭應當互相敬重。』論者，是假借文字般若，問答分析道理，顯示實相等。
般若虛玄，是三乘（聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘）的根本宗旨。『非知非見』叫做虛，『不有不無』叫做玄。又，四句所不能涵蓋的叫做虛，靈妙的覺照泯滅了能照和所照叫做玄。這是引用經文。『極』是極致的意思。三乘的人都崇尚般若，各自修學，只是根機有大小，成就各自的菩提。所以《大品般若經·聞持品》說：『善男子想要得到阿羅漢果，應當學習修行般若波羅蜜等。』
真正的道理只有一個，沒有差別，然而不同見解的論調紛亂已經很久了。正理只有一個，至極正確沒有差別。人們學習般若，隨著自己的見解形成不同的觀點，各自興起不同的論調，紛亂錯雜已經很久了。
有天竺（India）沙門鳩摩羅什（Kumārajīva），年少時就深入研究大乘佛法，研磨心機，探求其中的旨趣，獨自超越于言語文字的表面，巧妙地契合于虛無寂靜的境界。 English version: Furthermore, there are three types of Prajna. First, Real Mark Prajna (referring to Prajna as the real mark of all dharmas). Second, Contemplation Prajna (using wisdom to contemplate truth and phenomena). Third, Literal Prajna (capable of revealing the merit of Dharani). This treatise encompasses the aforementioned principles, revealing them according to the guidance of the text. The later statement 'no-knowing,' according to the following thesis, has two meanings in total. One is to eliminate falsehood, as it says below: 'Originally, there was no knowing taken through delusion, etc.' The second is to reveal truth, which has three aspects: First, original enlightenment is free from thought, knowing is non-knowing, hence it says below: 'The fruition has signless knowing, etc.' Second, initial enlightenment is no-knowing, meaning exhausting the profound, extinguishing illumination, comforting and uniting, without deliberation. Real Mark and Contemplation can be inferred. Third, literal no-knowing, meaning speech is suchness, the nature of words is emptiness, neither knowing nor not-knowing, yet still called no-knowing. Those who cultivate literal Prajna neither cling to nor separate from it, this is called cultivating the wisdom-mother of all Buddhas. It should be known that profound Prajna holds all merits, gives birth to endless Dharma gates, shatters the cage of afflictions, and freely attains perfect enlightenment. According to the Liang Dynasty records, Kumārajīva (鳩摩羅什) initially translated the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra, and the author of this treatise relied on it to write this treatise, presenting it to Kumārajīva upon completion. Kumārajīva praised, 'My understanding is no less than yours, the wording should be mutually respected.' The treatise is using literal Prajna, analyzing principles through questions and answers, revealing the real mark, and so on.
Prajna is empty and profound, it is the fundamental principle of the Three Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna, Bodhisattvayāna). 'Non-knowing and non-seeing' is called emptiness, 'neither existent nor non-existent' is called profound. Furthermore, what cannot be encompassed by the four statements is called emptiness, and the miraculous awareness extinguishing the illuminator and the illuminated is called profound. This is quoting the sutra. 'Ultimate' means the highest point. People of the Three Vehicles all revere Prajna, each cultivating and learning, but their capacities vary, leading to the attainment of their respective Bodhi. Therefore, the 'Hearing and Holding' chapter of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra says: 'Good men who wish to attain the Arhat fruit should study and practice Prajna Paramita, etc.'
The true principle is singular and without difference, yet the arguments of different views have been in disarray for a long time. The true principle is singular, supremely correct, and without difference. People study Prajna, forming different views according to their own understanding, each raising different arguments, causing confusion and disorder for a long time.
There was a Śrāmaṇa Kumārajīva (鳩摩羅什) from India (天竺), who in his youth deeply studied Mahayana Buddhism, refining his mind and exploring its meaning, uniquely surpassing the surface of words and language, subtly harmonizing with the realm of emptiness and tranquility.
【English Translation】 English version: Furthermore, there are three types of Prajna. First, Real Mark Prajna (referring to Prajna as the real mark of all dharmas). Second, Contemplation Prajna (using wisdom to contemplate truth and phenomena). Third, Literal Prajna (capable of revealing the merit of Dharani). This treatise encompasses the aforementioned principles, revealing them according to the guidance of the text. The later statement 'no-knowing,' according to the following thesis, has two meanings in total. One is to eliminate falsehood, as it says below: 'Originally, there was no knowing taken through delusion, etc.' The second is to reveal truth, which has three aspects: First, original enlightenment is free from thought, knowing is non-knowing, hence it says below: 'The fruition has signless knowing, etc.' Second, initial enlightenment is no-knowing, meaning exhausting the profound, extinguishing illumination, comforting and uniting, without deliberation. Real Mark and Contemplation can be inferred. Third, literal no-knowing, meaning speech is suchness, the nature of words is emptiness, neither knowing nor not-knowing, yet still called no-knowing. Those who cultivate literal Prajna neither cling to nor separate from it, this is called cultivating the wisdom-mother of all Buddhas. It should be known that profound Prajna holds all merits, gives birth to endless Dharma gates, shatters the cage of afflictions, and freely attains perfect enlightenment. According to the Liang Dynasty records, Kumārajīva (鳩摩羅什) initially translated the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra, and the author of this treatise relied on it to write this treatise, presenting it to Kumārajīva upon completion. Kumārajīva praised, 'My understanding is no less than yours, the wording should be mutually respected.' The treatise is using literal Prajna, analyzing principles through questions and answers, revealing the real mark, and so on.
Prajna is empty and profound, it is the fundamental principle of the Three Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna, Bodhisattvayāna). 'Non-knowing and non-seeing' is called emptiness, 'neither existent nor non-existent' is called profound. Furthermore, what cannot be encompassed by the four statements is called emptiness, and the miraculous awareness extinguishing the illuminator and the illuminated is called profound. This is quoting the sutra. 'Ultimate' means the highest point. People of the Three Vehicles all revere Prajna, each cultivating and learning, but their capacities vary, leading to the attainment of their respective Bodhi. Therefore, the 'Hearing and Holding' chapter of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra says: 'Good men who wish to attain the Arhat fruit should study and practice Prajna Paramita, etc.'
The true principle is singular and without difference, yet the arguments of different views have been in disarray for a long time. The true principle is singular, supremely correct, and without difference. People study Prajna, forming different views according to their own understanding, each raising different arguments, causing confusion and disorder for a long time.
There was a Śrāmaṇa Kumārajīva (鳩摩羅什) from India (天竺), who in his youth deeply studied Mahayana Buddhism, refining his mind and exploring its meaning, uniquely surpassing the surface of words and language, subtly harmonizing with the realm of emptiness and tranquility.
天竺或曰印土身毒。即五印婆羅門國。什公生龜茲。以父鳩摩羅炎本南天竺人。今從本稱。盛德如傳。言象出易經略例。言生於象象生於意。今以言喻能詮。像喻所詮。希夷出老氏。彼云。聽之不聞名曰希。視之不見名曰夷。今喻般若。離名曰希。離相曰夷。按什公本傳。幼學小乘。因悟蘇摩說阿耨達經。復學大方研心此趣。孤出於言象之外。妙合於實相之境。
集異學于迦夷 異學即西域外道。迦夷即佛生之國。亦通指諸國。集猶正也。師在天竺。破邪顯正非一。
揚淳(粹)風(教)于東扇。將爰(語辭)燭(照)殊方。而匿(隱)耀(光)涼土者。所以道不虛應。應必有由矣 殊方謂他國。涼土今西涼也。意謂什公將欲舉揚教風東傳漢地。值符堅失國姚萇僣逆。品光父子心不存法。師蘊其深解無所宣化。在涼十有三年。機緣未會隨世浮沉。是知佛法流行。亦待時節因緣。茍非其時道不虛行。
弘始三年歲次星紀。秦乘入國之謀。舉師(眾)以來之意也 萇子興即位歲號弘始。星紀者。瑤疏云。丑月星紀。今以月紀年也。秦乘下。梁傳云。弘始三年廟庭木生連理。逍遙觀蔥變成茞。以為美瑞。謂智人應入。五月秦遣隴西公碩德伐之。隆軍大破。九月品隆上表歸降。故云入國之謀。至十二月末
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 天竺，又稱印土或身毒（India）。指的是五印婆羅門國（the five regions of India inhabited by Brahmins）。鳩摩羅什（Kumārajīva）大師生於龜茲（Kucha），因為他的父親鳩摩羅炎（Kumārabodhi）本是南天竺人，所以現在沿用他的本籍稱呼。他的盛德就像傳記中記載的那樣。『言象』一詞出自《易經略例》。『言生於象，像生於意』。現在用『言』比喻能詮（that which expresses），用『象』比喻所詮（that which is expressed）。『希夷』出自老子。老子說：『聽之不聞名曰希，視之不見名曰夷。』現在用它來比喻般若（Prajna, wisdom）。離於名相叫做『希』，離於現象叫做『夷』。根據鳩摩羅什大師的本傳，他幼年學習小乘佛教（Hinayana），後來因為領悟了蘇摩（Sūrya-soma）所說的《阿耨達經》（Anavatapta），又學習大乘佛法（Mahayana），專心研究其中的趣味，他的思想孤絕於言語和現象之外，巧妙地契合于實相（reality）的境界。
在迦夷（Kapilavastu, the birthplace of Buddha）聚集不同的學說。『異學』指的是西域（Western Regions）的外道（non-Buddhist doctrines）。迦夷指的是佛陀出生的國家，也可以泛指各個國家。『集』有匡正的意思。鳩摩羅什大師在天竺，破除邪說，顯揚正法，不止一次。
將純粹的教風傳揚到東方。將要用（佛法）照亮其他地方，而使光芒隱匿在涼州（Liangzhou）的原因是，佛法不會徒勞地應驗，應驗必定有其原因。『殊方』指的是其他國家。涼土指的是現在的西涼（Western Liang）。意思是說鳩摩羅什大師將要舉揚教風，向東傳到漢地，正趕上符堅（Fu Jian）失去國家，姚萇（Yao Chang）篡位作亂，品光（Pin Guang）父子心中沒有佛法，大師蘊藏著深刻的理解卻無法宣揚教化，在涼州待了十三年。機緣沒有成熟，只能隨波逐流。由此可知佛法的流行，也要等待時節因緣。如果不是時候，佛法不會白白地傳播。
弘始三年，太歲在星紀（Capricorn），秦國（Qin）有了攻入我國的計劃，這是迎接大師到來的用意。姚萇的兒子姚興（Yao Xing）即位，年號為弘始。『星紀』，根據瑤疏（Yao Shu）的說法，丑月（the twelfth month of the lunar year）為星紀，現在用月份來紀年。『秦乘下』，梁傳（Liang Zhuan）記載，弘始三年，廟庭里長出連理木，逍遙園裡的蔥變成了茞草，認為這是美好的祥瑞，預示著有智慧的人應該到來。五月，秦國派遣隴西公（Duke of Longxi）碩德（Suo De）討伐（西涼），軍隊大敗。九月，品隆（Pin Long）上表歸降，所以說是攻入我國的計劃。到了十二月末。
【English Translation】 English version: In India, also known as Indu or Shendu (India), referring to the five regions of India inhabited by Brahmins. Master Kumārajīva was born in Kucha, because his father, Kumārabodhi, was originally from South India, so we now use his original place of origin to refer to him. His great virtue is as recorded in his biography. The term 'words and images' comes from the 'General Explanation of the Book of Changes'. 'Words are born from images, and images are born from ideas.' Now, 'words' are used to symbolize that which expresses, and 'images' are used to symbolize that which is expressed. 'Xi Yi' comes from Lao Tzu. Lao Tzu said, 'Listening to it, one does not hear it, it is called Xi; looking at it, one does not see it, it is called Yi.' Now, it is used to symbolize Prajna (wisdom). Being apart from names is called 'Xi', and being apart from phenomena is called 'Yi'. According to Master Kumārajīva's biography, he studied Hinayana (Small Vehicle) in his youth, and later, because he understood the Anavatapta Sutra spoken by Sūrya-soma, he also studied Mahayana (Great Vehicle), focusing on the interest within it. His thought is isolated from words and phenomena, and subtly coincides with the realm of reality.
Gathering different doctrines in Kapilavastu (the birthplace of Buddha). 'Different doctrines' refers to the non-Buddhist doctrines of the Western Regions. Kapilavastu refers to the country where the Buddha was born, and can also generally refer to various countries. 'Gathering' has the meaning of correcting. Master Kumārajīva, in India, refuted heresies and manifested the right Dharma more than once.
Spreading the pure teachings to the East. The reason for using (the Dharma) to illuminate other places, while concealing the light in Liangzhou, is that the Dharma will not be verified in vain, and verification must have its reasons. 'Other places' refers to other countries. Liangtu refers to the current Western Liang. It means that Master Kumārajīva was about to promote the teachings and spread them eastward to the Han region, just in time for Fu Jian losing his country and Yao Chang usurping the throne, Pin Guang and his son had no Dharma in their hearts, and the master contained deep understanding but could not preach and transform, staying in Liangzhou for thirteen years. The opportunity had not matured, so he could only drift with the tide. From this, it can be known that the prevalence of the Buddha-dharma also awaits the right time and conditions. If it is not the right time, the Dharma will not be spread in vain.
In the third year of Hongshi, the year was in Capricorn, the Qin state had a plan to invade our country, which was the intention to welcome the master to come. Yao Chang's son, Yao Xing, ascended the throne, and the reign title was Hongshi. 'Capricorn', according to Yao Shu's explanation, the twelfth month of the lunar year is Capricorn, and now the month is used to record the year. 'Qin Cheng Xia', Liang Zhuan records that in the third year of Hongshi, trees with connected branches grew in the temple court, and the scallions in Xiaoyao Garden turned into fragrant herbs, which were considered auspicious omens, indicating that wise people should come. In May, the Qin state sent the Duke of Longxi, Suo De, to attack (Western Liang), and the army was defeated. In September, Pin Long submitted a memorial to surrender, so it is said to be a plan to invade our country. By the end of December.
。師至長安。亦可師即什公。西伐之意舉師令來。
北天之運數其然矣 大品云。般若於佛滅后先至南方。次至西方。次至北方大盛。震旦在天竺東北。今什公道通應斯懸記。
大秦天王者。道契百王之端(首)德洽(沾)千載之下。遊刃萬機(事)弘道終日。信季(末)俗蒼生之所天。釋迦遺法之所仗也 王謙故不稱皇帝。但比跡三王。以春秋尊周為天王。故百王但泛舉前代帝王。遊刃出莊子。庖丁解牛運刃熟妙。故曰遊刃。彼云。其于遊刃必有餘地矣。謂秦王日親萬事。判決合宜如遊刃爾。又復終日弘闡佛法。蒼生即眾生也。謂蒼蒼然而生。亦可蒼者天也。自天生故。蓋隨俗說所天者。王德配天物蒙其蔭。昔金河顧命令王臣弘護。今王遵行法門依仗。
時乃集義學沙門五百餘人于逍遙觀。躬(親)執秦文。與什公參正方等 義學即僧史十科中義解。逍遙觀即今秦中草堂寺。本姚置層觀。於此什公入關。遂施為寺。準晉書載紀。王雅信佛法。請師宣譯。師執梵本王執秦文。更互參正譯出諸經(云云)方等者方正平等。即方廣分。
其所開拓者。豈唯當時之益。乃累劫之津樑矣 拓手承物也。亦拓開戶也。謂所譯經論開化一切。非直益於彼時。實為積劫迷津之橋樑。今藏海瑯函式越五千。師
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：大師到達長安。或許也可以說，亦可禪師就是鳩摩羅什大師。西伐的意圖是想請大師前來。
北方天運的定數大概就是這樣吧。《大品般若經》中說：般若在佛陀滅度后，先到南方，然後到西方，最後在北方大為興盛。震旦（中國）位於天竺（印度）的東北方，現在鳩摩羅什大師的佛法傳播，應驗了這個預言。
大秦天王，他的道與歷代帝王的開端相契合，他的德澤沾溉千秋萬代。處理政事遊刃有餘，整日弘揚佛法。是末世百姓所依靠的，是釋迦牟尼佛遺留的佛法所仰仗的。王謙本來不稱皇帝，只是比肩三王（夏禹、商湯、周文王），以春秋時代尊崇周朝為天王。所以百王只是泛指前代的帝王。遊刃出自《莊子》，廚師解牛運刀熟練巧妙，所以說遊刃。那裡說：『他的運刀一定有迴旋的餘地啊。』是說秦王每日親理萬事，判斷決斷都恰當適宜，就像遊刃一樣。又整日弘揚佛法。蒼生就是眾生。說蒼茫而生，也可以說蒼就是天。因為是天所生。大概是隨順世俗的說法，所依靠的是，王的德行可以匹配上天，萬物蒙受他的恩澤。過去金河的顧命大臣命令國王的大臣弘揚護持佛法，現在大王遵行佛法，有所依仗。
當時於是召集了五百多位精通義學的沙門在逍遙觀。親自拿著秦文，與鳩摩羅什大師一起參校訂正方等經典。義學就是僧史十科中的義解。逍遙觀就是現在的秦中草堂寺。本來是姚興設定的樓觀，鳩摩羅什大師進入關中后，就改建為寺廟。根據《晉書》記載，王雅信奉佛法，請大師宣講翻譯佛經。大師拿著梵文原本，王拿著秦文譯本，互相參校訂正翻譯出來的各種經典（云云）。方等就是方正平等，也就是方廣分。
他所開創的，難道僅僅是當時的利益嗎？而是累劫的津樑啊。拓，是用手承接東西。也是拓展開戶。是說所翻譯的經論開化一切，不僅僅利益於當時，實際上是為積累劫數的迷途眾生架設橋樑。現在藏海的瑯函超過五千卷，大師……
【English Translation】 English version: The master arrived at Chang'an. Perhaps it could also be said that Master Yike is Master Kumarajiva. The intention of the western expedition was to invite the master to come.
The destiny of the northern heavens is probably like this. The Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra says: Prajna will first go to the south after the Buddha's Nirvana, then to the west, and finally flourish greatly in the north. Zhendan (China) is located northeast of Tianzhú (India). Now, the spread of Master Kumarajiva's Dharma fulfills this prediction.
The Great Qin Heavenly King, his Dao is in harmony with the beginnings of past emperors, and his virtue benefits thousands of generations. He handles state affairs with ease and propagates the Dharma all day long. He is the reliance of the people in the degenerate age and the support of the Dharma left by Sakyamuni Buddha. Wang Qian originally did not call himself emperor, but compared himself to the Three Kings (Yu of Xia, Tang of Shang, and Wen of Zhou), respecting the Zhou Dynasty as the Heavenly King in the Spring and Autumn period. Therefore, the Hundred Kings are just a general reference to the emperors of previous generations. 'Handling with ease' comes from Zhuangzi. A cook dissects an ox with skilled and subtle movements, so it is said to be 'handling with ease'. It says there: 'His handling must have room to spare.' It means that the King of Qin personally manages all affairs every day, and his judgments are appropriate, just like handling with ease. He also propagates the Dharma all day long. Cangsheng means sentient beings. It is said that they are born in a vast expanse, or it can be said that cang is heaven. Because they are born from heaven. It is probably following the common saying that what they rely on is that the king's virtue can match heaven, and all things receive his grace. In the past, the entrusted ministers of Jinhe ordered the king's ministers to promote and protect the Dharma. Now, the Great King follows the Dharma and has something to rely on.
At that time, more than five hundred Shramanas (monks) who were proficient in Yixue (the study of meaning) were gathered at Xiaoyao Monastery. He personally held the Qin text and, together with Master Kumarajiva, participated in the correction of the Vaipulya Sutras. Yixue is the interpretation of meaning in the ten subjects of monastic history. Xiaoyao Monastery is now the Caotang Temple in Qinzhong. It was originally a pavilion set up by Yao Xing. After Master Kumarajiva entered Guanzhong, it was converted into a temple. According to the Book of Jin, Wang Ya believed in Buddhism and invited the master to preach and translate the scriptures. The master held the Sanskrit original, and the king held the Qin translation, mutually correcting and translating various scriptures (etc.). Vaipulya means upright and equal, which is the Vaipulya division.
What he pioneered, is it only the benefit of that time? But it is a bridge for countless kalpas. Tuo is to hold something with your hand. It is also to open the door. It means that the translated scriptures enlighten everything, not only benefiting that time, but actually building a bridge for sentient beings lost in the maze of accumulated kalpas. Now the Langhan (precious books) in the Treasure Sea (Buddhist scriptures) exceed five thousand volumes, Master...
所出經世多弘贊。
予以短乏。曾(則)廁(預)嘉會。以為上聞。異要始於時(此)也 論主謙云。我以才短智乏。則預什公嘉善之會。殊異要妙之義始於此時。聞自什公故云上聞。
然則聖智幽微深隱難測。無相無名。乃非言象之所得。為試罔象其懷。寄之狂言爾。豈曰聖心而可辯哉。試論之曰 聖智為般若之體離諸分別故云幽微。無相故非義象可思。無名故非言詮可議。故云難測。為試下意云。般若雖非名相可及。將欲悟物。亦當內亡其象。外寄其言以辯之。非言欲言故云狂也。莊子云。使罔象求而得之。舊本作惘字誤。豈曰下理非言辯。但寄言顯之 自下先引經定宗。后九次問答。抉擇宗中之意。令無餘惑。
放光云。般若無所有相無生滅相。道行雲。般若無所知無所見 略引二經。以示此論之所宗。放光即大品也。但兩譯成異。二十卷云。般若無所有相。第十五云。須菩提般若波羅蜜不生不滅相。道行第一云。般若波羅蜜當何從說。菩薩都不可得見亦不可知。無所有相者。謂有無知見等相皆離故。無生滅相者。非因緣所生故。亦四相不遷三際莫易。余如下釋。
此辯智照之用。而曰無相無知者何邪。果有無相之知不知之照明矣 初二句反核。未了之者云。二經正明智用。乃云無知
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
所出的經書世人多加讚揚。
我因為才識短淺。曾經參與鳩摩羅什（Kumārajīva）大師的盛會。以為是上層的傳聞。殊異精要的義理開始於此時。論主謙虛地說，我因為才短智乏，所以參與了鳩摩羅什大師嘉善的集會，這殊勝奇妙的義理是從這個時候開始聽聞的，因為是從鳩摩羅什大師那裡聽來的，所以說是上聞。
然而聖人的智慧幽深微妙，難以測度，沒有形象，沒有名稱，不是言語和形象所能達到的。姑且試著用虛無的意象來揣測它的內涵，寄託于狂放的言語罷了。難道說聖人的心意可以用言語來辨明嗎？試著論述它說：聖人的智慧是般若（Prajna）的本體，遠離一切分別，所以說是幽深微妙。沒有形象，所以不是義理和形象可以思量的。沒有名稱，所以不是言語可以議論的。所以說是難以測度。爲了試探下文的含義說，般若雖然不是名相可以企及的，將要開悟眾生，也應當內心忘卻形象，外在寄託于言語來辨明它。不是言語想要表達，所以說是狂放的言語。莊子說，使虛無的意象去尋求而得到它。舊本寫作『惘』字是錯誤的。難道說下文的道理不是言語可以辨明的嗎？只是寄託言語來顯明它。從下面開始先引用經文來確定宗旨，然後九次問答，決斷選擇宗旨中的含義，使沒有剩餘的疑惑。
《放光經》（Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra）說，般若沒有所有相，沒有生滅相。《道行經》（Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra）說，般若沒有所知，沒有所見。簡略地引用這兩部經，來顯示此論所宗。《放光經》就是《大品般若經》。只是兩種譯本成就不同。二十卷本說，般若沒有所有相。第十五卷說，須菩提（Subhuti），般若波羅蜜（Prajñāpāramitā）不生不滅相。《道行經》第一卷說，般若波羅蜜應當從何處說？菩薩（Bodhisattva）都不可得見，也不可知。無所有相，是說有無知見等相都遠離的緣故。無生滅相，不是因緣所生的緣故。也是四相不遷，三際莫易。其餘的如下面解釋。
這裡辯論智慧觀照的作用，卻說沒有形象，沒有知覺，這是為什麼呢？果真有無相的知覺和不知覺的照明嗎？最初兩句是反駁和核實。不瞭解的人說，這兩部經正是說明智慧的作用，卻說沒有知覺。
【English Translation】 English version:
The sutras it produced are widely praised by the world.
I, being short of talent and knowledge, once participated in the auspicious assembly of Master Kumārajīva (Kumārajīva). I thought it was a rumor from above. The extraordinary and essential meaning began at this time. The author of the treatise humbly said, 'Because I am short of talent and lack wisdom, I participated in Master Kumārajīva's assembly of good deeds. This extraordinary and wonderful meaning was first heard at this time. Because it was heard from Master Kumārajīva, it is said to be heard from above.'
However, the wisdom of the sages is profound and subtle, difficult to fathom, without form, without name, and cannot be reached by words and images. Let us try to speculate on its connotation with empty images, entrusting it to wild words. Can the mind of the sages be discerned by words? Let us try to discuss it, saying: The wisdom of the sages is the essence of Prajna (Prajna), far from all distinctions, so it is said to be profound and subtle. Without form, it cannot be contemplated by meaning and image. Without name, it cannot be discussed by words. Therefore, it is said to be difficult to fathom. In order to test the meaning of the following text, although Prajna cannot be reached by names and forms, if one wants to enlighten sentient beings, one should also forget the image in the heart and entrust it to words to distinguish it. It is not that words want to express, so it is said to be wild words. Zhuangzi said, 'Let the empty image seek and obtain it.' The old version writing the word '惘' is wrong. Is it not that the truth of the following text cannot be discerned by words? It is only entrusted to words to reveal it. From below, first quote the scriptures to determine the purpose, and then nine questions and answers, to decide and choose the meaning in the purpose, so that there is no remaining doubt.
The Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra (《放光經》) says, 'Prajna has no characteristic of possession, no characteristic of arising or ceasing.' The Aṣṭasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra (《道行經》) says, 'Prajna has nothing to know, nothing to see.' Briefly quote these two sutras to show what this treatise is based on. The Fangguang Jing is the Large Perfection of Wisdom Sutra. It's just that the two translations have different achievements. The twenty-volume version says, 'Prajna has no characteristic of possession.' The fifteenth volume says, 'Subhuti (須菩提), Prajñāpāramitā (般若波羅蜜) has no characteristic of arising or ceasing.' The first volume of the Daoxing Jing says, 'Where should Prajñāpāramitā be spoken from? Bodhisattvas (菩薩) cannot be seen or known.' The characteristic of having nothing is because the characteristics of having or not having knowledge and views are all far away. The characteristic of not arising or ceasing is not because it is born of causes and conditions. It is also that the four characteristics do not change, and the three periods are not easy. The rest is explained below.
Here, the function of wisdom illumination is debated, but it is said that there is no form and no perception. Why is this? Is there really formless perception and unconscious illumination? The first two sentences are rebuttals and verifications. Those who do not understand say that these two sutras are precisely explaining the function of wisdom, but they say that there is no perception.
無相。何故后二句略標。若斯之理果然而有(云云)謂真心靈鑒知非知相。無知而知。
何者(徴)夫有所知。則有所不知。以聖心無知故。無所不知。不知之知乃曰一切知 初二句舉妄。謂妄識取境能所昭然。故曰有知。妄見不周故。曰有所不知。何者。且丈夫心主只臨器身。常侍末那唯持見分。謀臣之識徒知有漏之鄉。五將之能但擊塵囂之境。各有份量知亦何真。故云爾爾。后四句示真。聖心不然。非能所取。故云無知。本覺靈明無法不照。故曰遍知。良以即智之體宛爾無涯。即體之智亦擴充無外。此以諸法本居智內。豈有智內之法而不知邪。佛性論云。以如如智稱如如境(云云)況法依心現無法非心。以即法之心。知即心之法尤遍知也。
故經云。聖心無所知。無所不知信矣 思益經第一云。以無所知故知。
是以聖人虛其心而實其照。終日知而未嘗(曾)知也。故能默獨韜光虛心玄(妙)鑒。閉智塞聰而獨覺冥冥(深遠)者矣 文似老書。義意實殊。虛心者。無知相故。實照者。有照用故。終日下知即無知故。默耀下正顯無相。但般若之體了非分別。義言韜默非故藏匿。閉智下智及聰屬能證之智。冥冥屬所證之理。以智證理返照歸寂。亦義言閉塞。獨覺者。智無二故。金光明說。佛果功德
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『無相』（Anatta，佛教術語，指沒有永恒不變的自體）。為什麼後面兩句只是略微提及？如果這個道理確實存在，那就是說真心如明鏡一般，照見一切，但並非通過分別認知。這是『無知而知』的境界。
（提問）為什麼這樣說呢？（回答）因為如果有所知，就必然有所不知。而聖人的心是『無知』的，所以才是『無所不知』。這種『不知』的『知』，才叫做『一切知』。前面的兩句是說妄識。妄識攀緣外境，能知和所知都清清楚楚，所以說『有知』。但妄見不能周遍一切，所以說『有所不知』。為什麼呢？比如，普通人的心識只能侷限於自身，末那識（Manas，佛教術語，意識的根本）也只能執著于見分（Vijnana，佛教術語，認識作用的各個方面）。謀臣的見識只能知道有漏的世間，將領的能力也只能觸及塵世的境界。各自都有侷限，這樣的『知』又怎麼能說是真知呢？所以這樣說。後面的四句是說真智。聖人的心不是這樣，沒有能知和所知的分別，所以說是『無知』。本覺（Prakriti，佛教術語，本來的覺悟）光明，沒有什麼是不能照見的，所以說是『遍知』。因為智慧的本體本來就是無邊無際的，智慧的作用也是廣大無外的。這是因為一切法本來就存在於智慧之中，難道智慧會對自身之內的法一無所知嗎？《佛性論》中說，用如如智（Tathata-jnana，佛教術語，真如的智慧）來認知如如境（Tathata-visaya，佛教術語，真如的境界）。更何況一切法都依心而顯現，沒有哪個法不是心的顯現。用即法的心，來認知即心的法，就更是遍知一切了。
所以經中說，『聖心無所知，無所不知』，確實如此。《思益經》第一卷中說，『以無所知故知』。
因此，聖人虛空其心，而充實其照用。整天都在『知』，卻好像從未『知』過一樣。所以能夠默默地收斂光芒，虛空其心，以玄妙之心來照鑒。閉塞智識和聽覺，而獨自覺悟那深遠的境界。』這段文字表面上像老子的著作，但其中的意義卻截然不同。『虛心』，是因為沒有知相。『實照』，是因為有照用的功能。『終日』以下，『知』就是『無知』的意思。『默耀』以下，正是爲了彰顯『無相』。只是因為般若（Prajna，佛教術語，智慧）的本體本來就不是分別，所以才用『韜默』來表達，並非故意隱藏。『閉智』以下，智和聰屬於能證的智慧，『冥冥』屬於所證的理。用智慧來證悟真理，反過來照亮自身，迴歸寂靜，這也是用『閉塞』來表達。『獨覺』，是因為智慧沒有分別。正如《金光明經》所說，佛果的功德。
【English Translation】 English version: 『Anatta』 (Non-self). Why are the last two sentences only briefly mentioned? If this principle truly exists, it means that the true mind is like a clear mirror, reflecting everything, but not through discriminative cognition. This is the state of 『knowing without knowing.』
(Question) Why is this said? (Answer) Because if there is something known, there must be something unknown. But the heart of a sage is 『unknowing,』 so it is 『knowing everything.』 This 『knowing』 of 『not knowing』 is called 『knowing all.』 The first two sentences refer to deluded consciousness. Deluded consciousness clings to external objects, and both the knower and the known are clear, so it is said to 『know.』 But deluded views cannot encompass everything, so it is said to 『not know everything.』 Why? For example, the mind of an ordinary person can only be limited to oneself, and Manas (the root of consciousness) can only cling to the seeing aspect (Vijnana, aspects of the function of cognition). The knowledge of a strategist can only know the world of outflows, and the ability of a general can only touch the realm of dust. Each has its limitations, so how can such 『knowing』 be said to be true knowledge? That's why it is said. The last four sentences refer to true wisdom. The heart of a sage is not like this, without the distinction between the knower and the known, so it is said to be 『unknowing.』 Original enlightenment (Prakriti, original enlightenment) is bright, and there is nothing that cannot be illuminated, so it is said to be 『knowing all.』 Because the essence of wisdom is originally boundless, and the function of wisdom is also vast and without limit. This is because all dharmas originally exist within wisdom, so how can wisdom be ignorant of the dharmas within itself? The Buddha-nature Treatise says, 『Use Suchness-wisdom (Tathata-jnana, wisdom of Suchness) to cognize Suchness-realm (Tathata-visaya, realm of Suchness).』 Moreover, all dharmas appear according to the mind, and there is no dharma that is not a manifestation of the mind. Using the mind that is identical to dharma to know the dharma that is identical to the mind is even more knowing everything.
Therefore, the sutra says, 『The sage's mind knows nothing, yet knows everything,』 which is indeed true. The first volume of the Si Yi Sutra says, 『Knowing because of not knowing.』
Therefore, the sage empties his mind and fills it with illumination. He 『knows』 all day long, yet it is as if he has never 『known.』 Therefore, he can silently conceal his light, empty his mind, and illuminate with a profound mind. He closes off knowledge and hearing, and alone awakens to that profound realm.』 This passage superficially resembles Lao Tzu's writings, but its meaning is completely different. 『Emptying the mind』 is because there is no appearance of knowing. 『Filling with illumination』 is because there is the function of illumination. From 『all day long』 onwards, 『knowing』 means 『not knowing.』 From 『silently shining』 onwards, it is precisely to reveal 『non-appearance.』 It is only because the essence of Prajna (wisdom) is originally non-discriminating that 『concealing silence』 is used to express it, not intentionally hiding it. From 『closing off knowledge』 onwards, knowledge and hearing belong to the wisdom that can realize, and 『profound』 belongs to the principle that is realized. Using wisdom to realize the truth, turning around to illuminate oneself, and returning to stillness, this is also expressed by 『closing off.』 『Awakening alone』 is because wisdom has no duality. As the Golden Light Sutra says, the merits of the Buddha-fruit.
唯如如及如如智獨存。如如深窅故曰冥冥。慈恩大師云。性質杳冥。義正同此。上乃權實不分。寂用雙融。實相般若該於一切。自下約二諦以明二智。不二而二。二而不二。即開實相為觀照也。以演宗中悲智相導。一念之力權慧具矣。
然則智有窮(極)幽(深)之鑑。而無知焉。神有應會之用而無慮焉 幽屬於理智。謂真智照無不極。故云窮幽。真諦非相故云無知。神謂俗智。應用難測。故名曰神。應會(者)感之必應不失其會。然水澄月現無心於化。故曰無慮。問大悲大愿豈非知邪。答無緣之悲無相之愿。皆亡知照也。故金剛三昧經云。若化眾生無生於化。不生無化其化大焉。問觀機審化寧非知邪。答據論本意。但由機感。雖應萬類神亦無思。教合根宜謂言觀審。一論上下此理昭然。
神無慮故。能獨王於世表。智無知故能玄(深妙)照於事外 神用涉有。由無思慮有不能縛。故云世表。王榮也。正智契真由非知故。事不為礙。故云事外。如清涼釋離世間。疏云。處世無染即是離也。
智雖事外未始無事。神雖世表終日域中(世間) 恐人聞實智事外。謂有外證空。故云未始無事。言即事見真。起信云以一切法悉皆真故。又聞權智世表謂不化物。故云爾也。謂處世不染即是世表。
所以
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 只有如如（tathata，真如）和如如智（tathata-jnana，真如之智）獨自存在。如如深邃幽遠，所以稱為冥冥。慈恩大師說，性質深遠幽暗，意義與此相同。上面是權智（upaya-jnana，方便之智）和實智（vastu-jnana，真實之智）不分，寂靜和作用雙重融合。實相（tathata，真如）般若（prajna，智慧）涵蓋一切。下面從二諦（satya-dvaya，真諦和俗諦）來說明二智（jnana-dvaya，兩種智慧），不二而二，二而不二，就是開啟實相為觀照。以演宗（Yogacara，瑜伽行派）中悲智相互引導，一念之力權智和實智都具備了。
如此說來，智有窮盡幽深之鑑察，卻沒有知覺。神有應合機會的作用，卻沒有思慮。幽屬於理智（jnana，智慧），說的是真智照見沒有不窮盡的，所以說窮幽。真諦（paramartha-satya，勝義諦）不是相，所以說沒有知覺。神指的是俗智（samvriti-jnana，世俗之智），應用難以測度，所以名為神。應會，是說感受它就一定有迴應，不會失去機會。然而水澄澈月亮顯現，沒有用心去造化，所以說沒有思慮。問：大悲（maha-karuna，偉大的悲憫）大愿（maha-pranidhana，偉大的誓願）難道不是知覺嗎？答：無緣之悲（niralambana-karuna，無所緣之悲）無相之愿（animitta-pranidhana，無相之愿），都是沒有知照的。所以《金剛三昧經》說，如果化度眾生，沒有生起化度之心，不生起化度之心，他的化度才偉大。問：觀察根機審度教化，難道不是知覺嗎？答：根據論的本意，只是由於根機的感應。雖然應和萬類，神也沒有思慮。教法符合根機，說是觀察審度。這一論上下，這個道理很明顯。
神沒有思慮，所以能獨自稱王於世間之外。智沒有知覺，所以能深妙地照見事物之外。神的作用涉及有，由於沒有思慮，有不能束縛它，所以說世間之外。王是尊榮的意思。正智（samyak-jnana，正智）契合真如，由於不是知覺，事物不能成為障礙，所以說事物之外。如清涼解釋《離世間》，疏中說，處在世間沒有染污就是脫離。
智雖然在事物之外，卻未嘗沒有事物。神雖然在世間之外，終日都在世間之中。恐怕有人聽到實智在事物之外，認為有向外求證的空。所以說未嘗沒有事物。說的是即事見真。起信論說，因為一切法都是真實的。又聽到權智在世間之外，認為不化度事物。所以這樣說。說的是處在世間沒有染污就是世間之外。
所以
【English Translation】 English version: Only Tathata (suchness) and Tathata-jnana (wisdom of suchness) exist alone. Because Tathata is deep and profound, it is called 'darkness'. The Great Master Ci'en said, 'The nature is deep and obscure,' and the meaning is the same. Above, expedient wisdom (upaya-jnana) and true wisdom (vastu-jnana) are not separated, and stillness and function are doubly integrated. Reality (Tathata) and Prajna (wisdom) encompass everything. Below, the two wisdoms (jnana-dvaya) are explained in terms of the two truths (satya-dvaya), not two but two, two but not two, which is to open reality as contemplation. In the Yogacara school, compassion and wisdom guide each other, and with the power of one thought, both expedient wisdom and true wisdom are complete.
Therefore, wisdom has the discernment of exhausting the profound, but it has no cognition. Spirit has the function of responding to opportunities, but it has no deliberation. Profound belongs to rational wisdom (jnana), which means that true wisdom illuminates without exhausting, so it is called 'exhausting the profound'. The ultimate truth (paramartha-satya) is not a form, so it is said to have no cognition. Spirit refers to conventional wisdom (samvriti-jnana), and its application is difficult to fathom, so it is called 'spirit'. 'Responding to opportunities' means that when one feels it, there will definitely be a response, and one will not miss the opportunity. However, when the water is clear, the moon appears, without using the mind to create, so it is said to have no deliberation. Question: Are great compassion (maha-karuna) and great vows (maha-pranidhana) not cognition? Answer: Compassion without conditions (niralambana-karuna) and vows without form (animitta-pranidhana) are all without cognition. Therefore, the Vajra Samadhi Sutra says, 'If you transform sentient beings, do not give rise to the mind of transformation; if you do not give rise to the mind of transformation, your transformation will be great.' Question: Is it not cognition to observe the faculties and examine the teachings? Answer: According to the original meaning of the treatise, it is only due to the response of the faculties. Although it responds to all kinds, the spirit has no deliberation. The teachings are in accordance with the faculties, which is said to be observation and examination. Throughout this treatise, this principle is clear.
Because the spirit has no deliberation, it can reign alone outside the world. Because wisdom has no cognition, it can profoundly illuminate outside of things. The function of the spirit involves existence, and because it has no deliberation, existence cannot bind it, so it is said to be outside the world. 'King' means honor. Correct wisdom (samyak-jnana) is in accordance with suchness, and because it is not cognition, things cannot become an obstacle, so it is said to be outside of things. As Qingliang explained 'Leaving the World', the commentary says, 'Being in the world without being defiled is to leave it.'
Although wisdom is outside of things, it has never been without things. Although the spirit is outside the world, it is in the world all day long. I am afraid that some people will hear that true wisdom is outside of things and think that there is emptiness to be sought externally. Therefore, it is said that it has never been without things. It is said that seeing the truth in things. The Awakening of Faith says, 'Because all dharmas are true.' Also, hearing that expedient wisdom is outside the world, they think that it does not transform things. That's why it is said. It is said that being in the world without being defiled is to be outside the world.
Therefore
俯仰順化應接無窮。無幽不察而無照功。斯則無知之所知。聖神之所會 初二句權用順機。或俯或仰根熟即應。應無窮極正由無思方能如是。俯謂俯就。即隨他意語。如人天小乘等。仰謂企仰。即隨自意語。如實教一乘等。次二句實智覺法法無不盡。非知非見故無照功。后二句雙結正由非知非會。然後能知能會。豈但知而無知等邪。權智亦合云非會之所會。上論二智知即非知非知而知等。下通論智體非有非無。
然其為物(體)也。實而非有虛而不無。存而不可論者。其唯聖智乎 欲揀前義故。再起文勢云然其等。實而非有者。雖真照炳然亦非有相。若取為有則著常見。虛而不無者。雖妙湛杳然。亦非無心。若取為無則落斷見。故般若妙存所以能聖。若無般若亦無聖人。但不可作有無等思議。其唯下結屬。
何者(徴釋)欲言其有無狀無名。欲言其無聖以之靈 無狀等者。名依相立相自緣生。有為法也。且即心覺照不從緣生。何有名相。聖以之靈者。聖人諸法盡覺萬緣普應。正由般若力通難思。何為無邪。
聖以之靈故虛不失照。無狀無名故照不失虛。照不失虛故混而不渝(變)虛不失照故動以接粗(俗事) 虛寂也。正由非有故寂立。非無故照存。正寂而常照。正照而常寂。展轉躡跡釋成前義。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 俯仰順化，應接無窮。沒有幽深之處不能洞察，卻沒有照見的功用。這就是無知之所知，聖神之所會。 前兩句是權巧地運用順應時機的智慧。或俯就，或仰望，根基成熟就能應機而發。應接無窮，正是由於沒有思慮才能如此。俯，是俯就，即隨順他人的意願，如人天乘、小乘等。仰，是企仰，即隨順自己的意願，如實教一乘等。 后兩句是說實智覺悟一切法，沒有不窮盡的。因為非知非見，所以沒有照見的功用。最後兩句總結，正是由於非知非會，然後才能知能會。豈止是知而無知等呢？權智也應該說是非會之所會。上面論述二智，知即非知，非知而知等。下面通論智體，非有非無。
然而它的本體，實在卻不是有，虛空卻不是無，存在卻不可用言語來論述的，大概只有聖智吧！ 爲了揀擇前面的意義，所以再次提起文勢說『然而』等。『實在卻不是有』，雖然真照明顯，也不是有相。如果執取為有，就著于常見。『虛空卻不是無』，雖然妙湛深遠，也不是無心。如果執取為無，就落入斷見。所以般若微妙地存在，因此能夠成聖。如果沒有般若，也就沒有聖人。但不可作有無等思議。『其唯』以下是總結歸屬。
什麼呢？（征問）說它有，卻沒有形狀沒有名稱；想說它無，聖人卻憑藉它而靈妙。 『無狀等者』，名稱依附於相而立，相自身由因緣而生，是有為法。而且這即心覺照不從因緣而生，哪裡有名相？『聖以之靈者』，聖人覺悟一切法，普遍應和萬緣，正是由於般若的力量通達難以思議，怎麼能說是沒有呢？
聖人憑藉它而靈妙，所以虛寂卻不失去照用；沒有形狀沒有名稱，所以照用卻不失去虛寂。照用不失去虛寂，所以混同而不改變；虛寂不失去照用，所以能以變動來接應粗俗之事。 虛寂，是說本體寂靜。正是由於非有，所以寂靜才能成立；非無，所以照用才能存在。正是寂靜而常常照見，正是照見而常常寂靜。輾轉追溯痕跡，解釋成就前面的意義。
【English Translation】 English version 'Bending down and looking up, they accord with transformation and respond without limit. There is no obscurity that is not examined, yet there is no function of illumination. This is what is known by the unknowing, and where the sacred and divine meet.' 'The first two sentences skillfully employ wisdom that accords with the occasion. Whether bending down or looking up, when the roots are ripe, one responds accordingly. Responding without limit is precisely because one is free from thought that one can be like this. 'Bending down' refers to condescension, that is, following the intentions of others, such as in the realms of humans and gods, or the Hinayana. 'Looking up' refers to aspiration, that is, following one's own intentions, such as in the true teaching of the One Vehicle.' 'The next two sentences state that the wisdom of reality (實智)覺悟 (覺) all dharmas (法), without exception. Because it is neither knowing nor seeing, there is no function of illumination. The last two sentences conclude that it is precisely because of non-knowing and non-meeting that one can then know and meet. How can it be merely knowing without knowing, etc.? Expedient wisdom (權智) should also be said to be where the non-meeting meets. The above discusses the two wisdoms: knowing is non-knowing, non-knowing is knowing, etc. The following generally discusses the substance of wisdom: neither existent nor non-existent.'
'However, its substance (體) is real but not existent, empty but not non-existent. Existing but not able to be discussed, it is perhaps only sacred wisdom (聖智)!' 'To distinguish the previous meaning, the text raises the point again, saying 'However,' etc. 'Real but not existent' means that although true illumination is clear, it is not an existent appearance. If one grasps it as existent, one becomes attached to the view of permanence. 'Empty but not non-existent' means that although profound and still, it is not without mind. If one grasps it as non-existent, one falls into the view of annihilation. Therefore, prajna (般若) subtly exists, and thus one can become a sage. Without prajna, there would be no sages. But one should not engage in thoughts of existence or non-existence, etc. 'It is perhaps only' below is the concluding attribution.'
'What is it? (徴*) To say it exists, it has no form and no name; to say it does not exist, the sage relies on it to be spiritually efficacious.' '『No form, etc.』 means that names are established based on appearances, and appearances themselves arise from conditions, which are conditioned dharmas (有為法). Moreover, this immediate mind-awareness does not arise from conditions, so how can it have names and appearances? 『The sage relies on it to be spiritually efficacious』 means that the sage覺 (覺) all dharmas (法) and universally responds to all conditions, precisely because the power of prajna (般若) penetrates the inconceivable. How can it be said to be non-existent?'
'The sage relies on it to be spiritually efficacious, so emptiness does not lose illumination; without form and without name, so illumination does not lose emptiness. Illumination does not lose emptiness, so it is mixed but does not change; emptiness does not lose illumination, so it moves to engage with the coarse (俗事).' 'Emptiness is stillness. It is precisely because it is non-existent that stillness can be established; it is non-non-existent that illumination can exist. It is precisely still and constantly illuminating, precisely illuminating and constantly still. Tracing back and forth, explaining and accomplishing the previous meaning.'
混而不渝者。謂正漚和時長在般若。故入生界不染不縛動。以等者。謂正般若時恒漚和故。義利流行。接引凡夫之粗也。
是以聖智之用未始暫廢。求之形相未暫可得 始初萌也。靈智妙存。如何暫時可廢。有無兩非。如何形相可得。言暫者少選不可。況久廢久得邪。非直有無諸相等不得。而智亦無得。言語道斷心行處滅。
故寶積曰。以無心意而現行。放光云。不動等覺而建立諸法。所以聖蹟萬端其致(旨)一而已矣 寶積即凈名經。長者子寶積嘆佛偈言。佛心意已滅寂也。而現行照也。放光二十九云。不動真際為諸法立處。聖蹟教也。屬上二經。古譯句為跡。尋跡得兔如尋句得義。下論直云教跡。致一者。謂在文有異於旨無殊。
是以般若可虛而照(心)真諦可亡而知(境)萬動可即而靜(境)聖應可無而為(心) 以所觀真諦妙絕諸相。但可非知而知故般若照時亡能亡所。唯虛而照。仁王云。正住觀察而無照相。萬動等者。以所應俗諦緣生性空即動而靜。亦令能應權智無為而為。心境前後互舉者。以心由境以境即心皆可。亦順文便不以辭害志。
斯則不知而自知(實)不為而自為(權)復何知哉。復何為哉 前二句結成知為。復何下恐聞知為心覆住著。此又遣之。般若菩薩少有所住。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『混而不渝』指的是，當正定（samadhi）與智慧（prajna）同時存在時，般若智慧始終存在。因此，進入生死輪迴的世界也不會被污染或束縛。『以等』指的是，當正定般若存在時，恒常地利益眾生，引導凡夫俗子走向解脫。
因此，聖人的智慧運用從未停止過，但若想從外在的形相上尋找，卻永遠無法找到。『始初萌』指的是最初的萌芽狀態。靈妙的智慧始終存在，怎麼會暫時停止呢？智慧既非有也非無，又怎麼能從形相上獲得呢？這裡說的『暫』，是指極短的時間都不可能，更何況是長久的停止或獲得呢？不僅有無等一切相都無法獲得，就連智慧本身也無法獲得。因為一旦達到『言語道斷，心行處滅』的境界，一切都超越了語言和思維。
所以，《寶積經》（Ratnakuta Sutra）中說：『以無心意而現行』。《放光般若經》（Prajnaparamita Sutra）中說：『不動等覺而建立諸法』。因此，聖人的種種教化方式雖然不同，但其根本目的卻是一致的。《寶積經》即《維摩詰經》。長者子寶積讚歎佛陀的偈語說，佛陀的心意已經滅寂，但卻能顯現種種神通。 《放光般若經》第二十九品說，以不動的真如實際作為諸法建立的基礎。『聖蹟』指的是聖人的教化。這裡指的是上面引用的兩部經。古譯本將『教』譯為『跡』，如同尋著軌跡找到兔子一樣，通過文字找到真義。下文直接說『教跡』。『致一』指的是，文字表達上可能有所不同，但其根本旨趣卻是一致的。
因此，般若智慧可以空虛而照見（心），真諦可以泯滅而知曉（境），萬物的變動可以即刻轉化為寂靜（境），聖人的應化可以無為而為（心）。因為所觀的真諦超越了一切形相，只能通過非知的方式去知曉，所以般若智慧照見時，能觀的主體和所觀的客體都消失了，只剩下空虛而照見的狀態。《仁王經》（Renwangjing）中說，『正住觀察而無照相』。『萬動等者』，因為所應化的世俗諦是因緣生滅、自性本空的，所以變動即是寂靜。這也使得能應化的權巧智慧能夠無為而為。這裡心和境前後交替地舉例，是因為心由境生，境即是心，都是可以的。同時也爲了順應文意，不因為拘泥於文字而損害了真義。
這樣就是不知而自知（實），不為而自為（權），還知道什麼呢？還做什麼呢？前兩句總結了知和為的作用。『復何下』是擔心聽到知和為的作用后，心中又產生執著，所以又加以遣除。般若菩薩不應有任何執著。
【English Translation】 English version: 'Ming Er Bu Yu' refers to when correct samadhi and prajna (wisdom) exist simultaneously, prajna wisdom is always present. Therefore, entering the world of samsara will not be contaminated or bound. 'Yi Deng' refers to when correct prajna exists, it constantly benefits sentient beings, guiding ordinary people towards liberation.
Therefore, the use of the sage's wisdom has never ceased, but if one wants to find it from external appearances, it can never be found. 'Shi Chu Meng' refers to the initial state of germination. The subtle wisdom is always present, how can it be temporarily stopped? Wisdom is neither existent nor non-existent, so how can it be obtained from appearances? The 'temporary' mentioned here refers to the impossibility of even a very short time, let alone a long period of cessation or attainment. Not only can all phenomena such as existence and non-existence not be obtained, but even wisdom itself cannot be obtained. Because once the state of 'words are cut off, the mind's activity ceases' is reached, everything transcends language and thought.
Therefore, the Ratnakuta Sutra says: 'Acting without mind.' The Prajnaparamita Sutra says: 'Establishing all dharmas without moving from perfect enlightenment.' Therefore, although the various teachings of the sages are different, their fundamental purpose is the same. The Ratnakuta Sutra is the Vimalakirti Sutra. The elder's son, Baoji, praised the Buddha's verses, saying that the Buddha's mind has been extinguished, but he can manifest various supernatural powers. Chapter 29 of the Fangguang Prajnaparamita Sutra says that the unchanging true suchness is the foundation for the establishment of all dharmas. 'Sacred traces' refers to the teachings of the sages. This refers to the two sutras quoted above. The ancient translation translated 'teaching' as 'traces', just as finding a rabbit by following its tracks, finding the true meaning through words. The following text directly says 'teaching traces'. 'Zhi Yi' means that the wording may be different, but the fundamental purpose is the same.
Therefore, prajna wisdom can be empty and illuminating (mind), the ultimate truth can be extinguished and known (object), the movement of all things can be instantly transformed into stillness (object), and the sage's response can be non-action and action (mind). Because the ultimate truth that is observed transcends all forms, it can only be known through non-knowing, so when prajna wisdom illuminates, the observing subject and the observed object disappear, leaving only the state of emptiness and illumination. The Renwangjing says, 'Correctly dwell in observation without the appearance of observation.' 'Wan Dong Deng Zhe', because the conventional truth that should be responded to is conditioned arising and empty in nature, so movement is stillness. This also enables the expedient wisdom that can respond to be non-action and action. The examples of mind and object are given alternately before and after, because mind arises from object, and object is mind, both are possible. At the same time, in order to conform to the meaning of the text, the true meaning is not damaged because of sticking to the words.
In this way, it is not knowing but knowing (reality), not doing but doing (expedient), what else is there to know? What else is there to do? The first two sentences summarize the function of knowing and doing. 'Fu He Xia' is worried that after hearing the function of knowing and doing, attachments will arise in the mind, so it is eliminated again. The prajna bodhisattva should not have any attachments.
便落妄想。著我人相即非菩薩。是故有得無得皆無所得。迥然無寄真智現前。然燈記別而得菩提 自下大段九重問答。抉擇前義。前依宗致粗述大綱。今賓主往復令人精曉。故遺民云。此辯遂通。則般若眾流殆不言而會。良有以也。
難曰。夫聖人真心獨朗物物斯照。應接無方動與事會。物物斯照故知無所遺。動與事會故會不失機。會不失機故必有會於可會。知無所遺故必有知于可知。必有知于可知故。聖無虛知。必有會於可會故。聖不虛會 難曰。下至會不失機。謂真智盡諸法之實。權智應萬物之感。皆不失也。會不下四句云庵達公云。必有能會之智。應可會之機。亦有能知之智。知可知之理。必有下四句言實有知會。
既知既會。而曰無知無會者何邪 正難可知。
能夫忘知遺會者。則是聖人無私于知會。以成其私耳 初句敘救后皆明意。此同老氏。以前文難定有知有會。恐救云。聖人雖有知會。以其不矜不恃。知如不知會如不會。故云忘知遺會。若爾此則但是聖人不以知會自長取為己私。然由虛心不自長。故為物推載。返以知會歸於聖人。是聖人不能逃其知會之長。竟成己私爾。如老氏云。后其身而身先。非以其無私邪。故能成其私。彼意云。后其身不欲私己也。然己讓人。人必讓己。本欲
在後而返在前。是成其私耳。
斯可謂(說)不自有其知。安(豈)得無知哉 據上所救。但是聖人不以知會自取為長。豈一向無知會。非無之太甚邪。
答曰。夫聖人功高二儀而不仁(權)明逾(越)日月而彌(益)昏(實) 二儀天地容儀。不仁文出老氏。取義不同。彼云。天地不仁以萬物為芻狗。意云。天地無私。雖以仁恩產生萬物。於物不望其報。如人縛芻為狗亦不責于吠守。此老氏意也。論意云。大權普度功高天地。然無緣之慈化而無化不住化相。故云不仁。如金剛般若云。四生九類我皆度之。功高也。而無有一眾生實滅度者。不仁也。明逾等者。謂實智照理明也。都無分別昏也。又明逾日月遍知也。彌昏無知也。唐光瑤和尚意同。
豈曰。木石瞽(盲)其懷其于無知而已哉。我言無知知即。無知非如。木石聾瞽無覺。
誠以異於人者神明故。不可以事相求之耳 神妙靈明謂般若也。事相謂人之情見。蓋前所難者。于知不恃于會不矜。但人之情識虛心容物比無相般若。相去邈然。莫認不矜便為般若。顏子虛懷。孟反不伐。未聞入理。
子意欲令聖人不自有其知。而聖人未嘗不有知 複審前難。以前云此可謂聖人不自有其知。安得無知哉。故先審定下。責云。
無(不
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：在後面卻反而走在前面，這是成就了他的私慾啊。
這可以說是『不自以為有知識』。難道會沒有知識嗎？根據上面所說的救濟，只是聖人不把知識和領會當作自己的長處。難道是一向沒有知識和領會嗎？這難道不是太過分了嗎？
回答說：聖人的功德高於天地，卻不施仁愛（權宜），光明勝過日月，卻更加闇昧（實在）。二儀指天地容貌。『不仁』一詞出自老子，取義不同。老子說：『天地不仁，以萬物為芻狗。』意思是說，天地沒有私心，雖然用仁愛恩惠產生萬物，卻不期望萬物回報。就像人扎草為狗，也不責怪它吠叫守護。這是老子的意思。這裡的意思是說，偉大的權宜普度，功德高於天地，然而以無緣大慈進行教化，沒有不能教化的，也沒有執著于教化的表象，所以說『不仁』。如同《金剛經》所說：『四生九類我都度化他們。』這是功高。『而沒有一個眾生真正被我度化。』這是不仁。『明逾等者』，是說實在的智慧照亮真理，光明無比。『都無分別』就是闇昧。又，光明勝過日月，是說遍知一切。『彌昏』就是無知。唐朝光瑤和尚的理解相同。
難道說，像木頭石頭一樣，盲昧無知，就只是沒有知識而已嗎？我說『無知』就是『知』，『無知』不是像木頭石頭那樣聾瞎沒有感覺。
實在是因為聖人異於常人的地方在於神明，所以不能用世俗的情形來要求他們。神妙靈明指的是般若智慧。『事相』指的是人的情見。大概前面所責難的，是不依賴於知識，不矜持于領會。但是人的情識虛心容物，和無相般若相比，相去甚遠。不要認為不矜持就是般若。顏回虛懷若谷，孟反不誇耀自己，但沒聽說他們因此而悟入真理。
您的意思是想讓聖人不自以為有知識，但是聖人從來沒有沒有知識的時候。
再次審視前面的責難。因為前面說『這可以說是聖人不自以為有知識。難道會沒有知識嗎？』所以先審定下文，責問說：
【English Translation】 English version: To be behind and yet return to be in front; this is to accomplish his own selfishness.
This can be said to be 'not possessing knowledge of oneself.' How can one be without knowledge? According to the salvation mentioned above, it is just that the sage does not take knowledge and understanding as his own strengths. Is it that he never has knowledge and understanding? Isn't that going too far?
The answer is: The sage's merit is higher than the two spheres (heaven and earth), yet he is without benevolence (expediency); his brightness surpasses the sun and moon, yet he is even more obscure (substantial). 'Two spheres' refers to the appearance of heaven and earth. The term 'without benevolence' comes from Lao Tzu, but the meaning is different. Lao Tzu said, 'Heaven and earth are without benevolence, treating all things as straw dogs.' The meaning is that heaven and earth have no selfishness; although they generate all things with kindness and grace, they do not expect anything in return. It is like a person tying straw to make a dog, not expecting it to bark and guard. This is Lao Tzu's meaning. The meaning here is that great expediency universally saves, and its merit is higher than heaven and earth. However, it teaches with causeless great compassion, and there is nothing that cannot be taught, nor is there attachment to the appearance of teaching, so it is said to be 'without benevolence.' As the Diamond Sutra says, 'I have delivered all beings of the four births and nine categories.' This is high merit. 'Yet there is not a single being who is actually delivered by me.' This is without benevolence. 'Brightness surpassing' means that true wisdom illuminates the truth, and it is infinitely bright. 'Without any discrimination' is obscurity. Also, brightness surpassing the sun and moon means knowing everything. 'Even more obscure' means without knowledge. The Tang Dynasty monk Guang Yao had the same understanding.
Is it said that, like wood and stone, being blind and ignorant, it is just being without knowledge? I say 'without knowledge' is 'knowledge'; 'without knowledge' is not like wood and stone, being deaf, blind, and without feeling.
It is truly because the sage's difference from ordinary people lies in his spiritual brilliance, so one cannot demand of them with worldly affairs. 'Spiritual brilliance' refers to prajna wisdom. 'Affairs and appearances' refers to people's emotions and views. What was questioned earlier is not relying on knowledge and not being conceited about understanding. However, people's emotional consciousness, with a humble mind accommodating things, is far removed from the formless prajna. Do not think that not being conceited is prajna. Yan Hui was humble and receptive, and Meng Fan did not boast about himself, but it has not been heard that they entered the truth because of this.
Your intention is to make the sage not think he possesses knowledge, but the sage has never been without knowledge.
Again, examine the previous difficulty. Because it was said earlier, 'This can be said to be the sage not possessing knowledge of himself. How can one be without knowledge?' Therefore, first examine and determine the following text, and question it, saying:
)乃(助辭)乖于聖心。失於文旨者乎 無乃文簡。具云豈不乃也。如外典云。無乃為佞乎。若定有知。豈不乖心違教。
何者。經云。真般若者。清凈如虛空。無知無見無作無緣 大品含受品云。摩訶衍如虛空。無見無聞無知無識。三假品云。般若於諸法無所見等。真揀惑取。清凈者。絕相之義。無知下釋成清凈。作者。造也。謂無師自然之智。非因所作非緣所生。仁王云。無行無緣義同。
斯則知自無知矣。豈待返照然後無知哉 斯者。指所引經。既云般若即是知體。復云無知無見。據斯經意。知即無知。豈待反收其照閉目塞聰。絕聖去智冥如木石。謂無知邪。
若有知性空而稱凈者 假牒彼救也。恐難者別會經意救云。經稱般若清凈者。非謂無知故清凈。約知見性空故云清凈。若云爾者下反詰云。
則不辨于惑智。三毒四倒皆亦清凈。有何獨尊凈于般若 若云。般若有知有見但性空故。經說清凈者。則與惑智不相殊畏。何者。夫三毒四倒皆亦性空。亦應清凈。據此而知不約性空。但約無知無見。惑智即三毒等分別名智。如下云惑智之無。起信六粗智相是惑故。
若以所知美般若 所知者。即真諦。恐難者再救云。經稱清凈。非約能知般若無知無見。但約所知真諦清凈。故美般若
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：難道這不違背佛陀的心意，偏離經文的主旨嗎？『無乃』一詞，是『豈不』的意思，例如外典中說：『無乃為佞乎』，如果般若確實有知，豈不是違背了佛心和教義？
什麼是『真般若』？經中說，『真般若』清凈如虛空，無知無見，無作無緣。《大品般若經·含受品》中說：『摩訶衍（Mahayana，大乘）如虛空，無見無聞無知無識。』《三假品》中說：『般若於諸法無所見』等等。『真』是簡別迷惑而取真如，『清凈』是斷絕一切相的意義。『無知』等是解釋成就清凈。『作者』，是造作的意思，指沒有老師而自然產生的智慧，不是因緣所造作，也不是因緣所生。仁王經中說：『無行無緣』，意義相同。
這樣說來，智慧本身就是無知的了，難道還要等待反觀自照之後才達到無知嗎？『斯』，指的是所引用的經文。既然說般若是智慧的本體，又說無知無見，根據這部經的意思，智慧就是無知。難道要反過來收斂視線，閉上眼睛塞住耳朵，斷絕聖智，像木頭石頭一樣冥頑不靈，才叫做無知嗎？
如果說因為有知之性本空才稱為清凈，
那麼就無法區分迷惑和智慧了，三毒（貪嗔癡）四倒（常樂我凈顛倒）也都是清凈的，憑什麼只有般若才尊貴清凈呢？如果說，般若有知有見，但因為其自性本空，所以經中說它是清凈的，那麼就和迷惑、智慧沒有區別了。為什麼呢？因為三毒四倒的自性也都是空的，也應該說是清凈的。由此可知，清凈不是指自性本空，而是指無知無見。迷惑和智慧，也就是三毒等的分別名稱為智慧，如下文所說『惑智之無』。《起信論》中說，六粗中的智相是迷惑。
如果用所知來美化般若，『所知』，就是真諦（Paramārtha-satya，第一義諦）。恐怕提問者再次辯解說，經中說清凈，不是因為能知的般若無知無見，而是因為所知的真諦清凈，所以才美化般若。
【English Translation】 English version: Wouldn't this be contrary to the Buddha's mind and deviate from the main point of the scriptures? The term 'wu nai' (無乃) means 'qi bu' (豈不), like in the external classics which say, 'Wu nai wei ning hu' (無乃為佞乎, Isn't it flattery?). If Prajna (般若, wisdom) truly has knowledge, wouldn't it be contrary to the Buddha's mind and teachings?
What is 'true Prajna'? The scriptures say, 'True Prajna is pure like empty space, without knowledge, without seeing, without action, without conditions.' The 'Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra, Chapter on Acceptance' says, 'Mahayana (摩訶衍, Great Vehicle) is like empty space, without seeing, without hearing, without knowing, without perceiving.' The 'Chapter on Three Falsities' says, 'Prajna does not see anything in all dharmas,' and so on. 'True' is to distinguish truth from delusion, and 'pure' is the meaning of cutting off all forms. 'Without knowledge' and so on explain the accomplishment of purity. 'Action' refers to creation, meaning the wisdom that arises naturally without a teacher, not created by causes and conditions, nor born from conditions. The Renwang Sutra (仁王經) says, 'Without action, without conditions,' with the same meaning.
In this case, wisdom itself is without knowledge. Does one have to wait for introspection before achieving non-knowing? 'Si' (斯) refers to the scriptures cited. Since it is said that Prajna is the essence of wisdom, and yet it is also said to be without knowledge or seeing, according to the meaning of this scripture, wisdom is without knowledge. Does one have to turn inward, close one's eyes and block one's ears, cut off sagely wisdom, and be as dull as wood or stone to be called without knowledge?
If it is said that it is called pure because the nature of knowledge is empty,
then it would be impossible to distinguish between delusion and wisdom. The three poisons (greed, hatred, delusion) and the four inversions (顛倒, perceiving permanence, pleasure, self, and purity in what is impermanent, painful, selfless, and impure) would also be pure. Why is only Prajna uniquely honored as pure? If it is said that Prajna has knowledge and seeing, but because its nature is empty, the scriptures say it is pure, then there would be no difference between it and delusion and wisdom. Why? Because the nature of the three poisons and four inversions is also empty, and they should also be called pure. From this, we know that purity does not refer to the emptiness of nature, but to the absence of knowledge and seeing. Delusion and wisdom, that is, the discriminating names of the three poisons, etc., are called wisdom, as it is said below, 'the absence of deluded wisdom.' The Awakening of Faith says that the aspect of wisdom in the six coarse aspects is delusion.
If one uses the known to beautify Prajna, 'the known' is Paramārtha-satya (真諦, ultimate truth). Fearing that the questioner might argue again, saying that the scriptures say it is pure, not because the knowing Prajna is without knowledge or seeing, but because the known Paramārtha-satya is pure, therefore Prajna is beautified.
云。清凈者。
所知非般若。所知自常凈。故般若未嘗(曾)凈。亦無緣(因)致(得)凈嘆于般若 能所宛然。豈所知凈故令能知亦凈。而嘆美之。
然經云。般若清凈者。將無以般若體性真凈。本無惑取之知。本無惑取之知。不可以知名哉。豈唯無知名無知。知自無知矣 會經正意。將無者。豈非也。既不約性空及所知。云清凈。然經言清凈。有二意。一智體真凈非知見故。二本無惑取之知故。既本無矣。難以知名。豈唯下恐疑者聞前云。性凈無知。謂兀然絕照。故今遣云。以知無知相故。本無惑取故。知即無知也。
是以聖人以無知之般若。照彼無相之真諦。真諦無兔馬之遺(跡)般若無不窮之鑑 前二句明以智證理。后二句證理之相。兔馬者。即經中所說象馬兔同渡一河。河自無殊得有淺深。以喻三乘同入法性淺深三異。今意云。以所證真諦本無兔馬淺深之跡以軌般若。般若亦無差別無窮之鑑照也。
所以會而不差當而無是(權)寂怕(靜)無知而無不知者矣(實) 不差者。應不失機即前無不為也。無是者。由感而應。本非我故。寂怕下可知。此但抉擇前宗中真諦可亡而知等。
難曰。夫物無以自通。故立名以通物。物雖非名果有可名之物。當於此名矣。是以即名求物。物
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 問：什麼是清凈的般若？
答：以所知為對象並非般若。所知本身是常凈的。因此，般若從未曾被染污，也無需因緣來獲得清凈。如果因為能知和所知宛然存在，就認為是因為所知清凈才使得能知也清凈，從而讚美它，這是不對的。
然而，經中說『般若清凈』，難道不是因為般若的體性是真實清凈的，本來就沒有迷惑取捨的知見嗎？本來就沒有迷惑取捨的知見，難道可以用名言來描述嗎？豈止是沒有名言可以描述，沒有知見可以認知，知見本身就是無知的。
理解經文的真正含義，難道不是這樣嗎？既然不是從性空和所知的角度來說清凈，那麼經文所說的清凈，有兩種含義：一是智慧的體性是真實清凈的，不是知見；二是本來就沒有迷惑取捨的知見。既然本來就沒有，就難以用名言來描述。『豈唯』以下是恐怕有人聽到前面說性凈無知，就認為般若像木頭一樣兀然絕照，所以現在解釋說，因為知沒有知的相狀，本來就沒有迷惑取捨，所以知就是無知。
因此，聖人以無知的般若，照見那無相的真諦。真諦沒有兔馬渡河留下的淺深之跡，般若也沒有窮盡的鑑照。
前面兩句說明用智慧證悟真理，後面兩句說明真理的相狀。『兔馬』，就是經中所說的象、馬、兔一同渡河，河水本身沒有差別，卻因為動物不同而顯得有深淺。這比喻三乘（聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘）一同進入法性，卻因為根器不同而有深淺的差異。現在這裡的意思是說，所證悟的真諦本來就沒有兔馬渡河留下的淺深之跡來規範般若，般若也沒有差別無窮的鑑照。
所以，般若能夠契合真理而沒有偏差，應機施設而沒有固定的主張（權巧方便），寂靜無為而無所不知（真實智慧）。
『不差』，是指應機而不失時機，就是前面所說的無所不為。『無是』，是指由感應而生，本來不是我所固有的。『寂怕』以下可以類推得知。這裡只是爲了決斷前面宗派中認為真諦可以泯滅而知見等不能泯滅的觀點。
提問：事物沒有辦法自己溝通，所以設立名稱來溝通事物。事物雖然不是名稱本身，但確實有可以被名稱指代的事物。因此，通過名稱來尋求事物，事物...
【English Translation】 English version: Question: What is pure Prajna (wisdom)?
Answer: That which is known (所知) is not Prajna. That which is known is inherently and eternally pure. Therefore, Prajna has never been impure, nor does it require causes (緣) to attain (致) purity. To praise Prajna by saying that because the knower (能知) and the known (所知) are clearly distinct, the purity of the known causes the knower to also be pure, is incorrect.
However, the Sutra says, 'Prajna is pure.' Could it be that Prajna's intrinsic nature is truly pure, originally without deluded grasping of knowledge? Since there is originally no deluded grasping of knowledge, can it be described by names? Not only is there no name to describe it, and no knowledge to cognize it, but knowledge itself is without knowledge.
Understanding the true meaning of the Sutra, isn't it so? Since it doesn't speak of purity in terms of emptiness of nature (性空) or the known, the Sutra's statement of purity has two meanings: first, the essence of wisdom is truly pure, not based on knowledge and views; second, it originally has no deluded grasping of knowledge. Since it originally doesn't exist, it's difficult to describe with names. '豈唯' (How could it only be) below addresses the concern that someone might hear the previous statement about the purity of nature being without knowledge and think that Prajna is like a piece of wood, blank and without illumination. Therefore, it explains that because knowledge has no aspect of knowledge, and originally has no deluded grasping, knowledge is precisely without knowledge.
Therefore, the sage uses the Prajna of no-knowledge to illuminate the Truth (真諦) of no-form (無相). The Truth has no traces of rabbits and horses crossing a river (兔馬之遺蹟), and Prajna has inexhaustible illumination.
The first two sentences explain using wisdom to realize the Truth, and the last two sentences explain the aspect of the Truth. 'Rabbit and horse' refers to the Sutra's analogy of an elephant, a horse, and a rabbit crossing the same river. The river itself has no difference, but appears to have different depths because of the different animals. This is a metaphor for the three vehicles (聲聞乘, 緣覺乘, 菩薩乘) entering the Dharma-nature (法性) together, but having different depths due to different capacities. The meaning here is that the Truth realized originally has no traces of rabbits and horses crossing a river to define Prajna, and Prajna also has no differentiated and exhaustible illumination.
Therefore, Prajna can accord with the Truth without deviation, respond appropriately without fixed notions (skillful means 權), be tranquil and inactive (寂怕) and yet know everything (true wisdom 實).
'不差' (Without deviation) means responding without missing the opportunity, which is the same as the previous statement of being able to do everything. '無是' (Without fixed notions) means arising from interaction and response, and not being inherently mine. The meaning of '寂怕' (tranquil and inactive) below can be inferred. This is simply to resolve the view in the previous schools that the Truth can be extinguished, but knowledge and so on cannot be extinguished.
Objection: Things cannot communicate by themselves, so names are established to communicate things. Although things are not the names themselves, there are indeed things that can be referred to by names. Therefore, seeking things through names, the things...
不能隱 此難知及無知二名互違。今且立理文亦易通。意云。名能召物名正則物順。此依世諦名可得物。如召火時不以水應。而論云。聖心無知。又云。無所不知。二名互違也。難實例權。
意謂無知未嘗知。知未嘗無知。斯則名教之所通。立言(名)之本意也 例如寒暖相反得失互非。言教詮量太通之理。立名本意自有定體。
然論者欲一于聖心。異於文旨。尋文(名)求實(心)未見其當 知即無知是一其心。然二名互非。心豈成一哉。
何者。若知得於聖心。無知無所辨。若無知得於聖心。知亦無所辨。若二都無得。無所復論哉 此言若聖心有知。宜置無知。若聖心無知。宜置有知。若聖心雙非。更不復說二名。二名既成互非三義。皆為不可。
答曰。經云。般若義者。無名無說非有。非無非實非虛。虛不失照。照不失虛。斯則無名之法。故非言所能言也 亦義引放光等經。由難者。依名求實二名既違。謂聖心亦異。不知般若非名非相。故引經以遮令忘名會旨。經約遮詮可知。斯則下論辭略釋無名無說。以起下文。
言雖不能言。然非言無以傳。是以聖人終日言而未嘗言也。今試為子狂言辨之 大方便佛報恩經初捲雲。法無言說。如來以妙方便。能以無名相法作名相說。
夫聖心者。微妙無相不可為有。用之彌勒不可為無。不可為無。故聖智存焉。不可為有。故名教絕焉 微妙等者。謂聖心離知見作緣等相。非有也。用之下聖心靈妙照理達事。用無怠息非無也。亦擬老氏。既云。妙無諸相。名教詮之不及以通。前難即名求物。物不能隱。今般若非物名依何立。欲以有知無知定名聖心邪。大論三十七云。一切世間著有無二見等。
是以言知不為知。欲以通其鑒。不知非不知。欲以辨其相 言知下若說有知。但欲令人通曉其鑑照之用。豈有知相可取。不知下若說無知。但欲令人知無惑取之相。豈謂一向無知。
辨相不為無通鑑不為有。非有故知而無知。非無故無知而知 謂般若之體無知無見。亦非是無。有鑑有靈。亦非是有。非有下但躡前。釋成知與無知非一非異。方詺中道之心。
是以知即無知無知即知。無以言(名)異而異於聖心也 無以者。戒止之辭。
難曰。夫真諦深玄非智不測。聖智之能在茲而顯 法性深廣玄妙難思。唯般若能證。故此智證真功能顯著。
故經云。不得般若不見真諦 反明也。亦義引般若。智論十八云。解脫涅槃道皆從般若得。
真諦則般若之緣也。以緣求智智則知矣 意云。境為心緣。真即所證之境。智即能證之心
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 聖人之心，微妙而無形相，不能說它存在；運用它，充滿一切（彌勒，未來佛），不能說它不存在。不能說它不存在，所以聖人的智慧存在於其中；不能說它存在，所以名相教義無法描述它。『微妙等者』，是指聖人之心遠離了知見、造作因緣等形相，所以不是『有』。『用之下』，聖人的心靈靈妙，照亮真理，通達事理，運用起來沒有止息，所以不是『無』。這也類似於老子的思想。既然說『妙無諸相』，名相教義無法詮釋它，無法通達。前面的難點在於用名相去尋求事物，事物無法隱藏。現在般若不是事物，名相依據什麼而建立？想要用『有知』或『無知』來定義聖人之心嗎？《大智度論》第三十七卷說，一切世間都執著于『有』和『無』兩種見解等。
因此，說『知』不是爲了執著于『知』，而是爲了通達它的鑑照之用；說『不知』不是爲了執著于『不知』，而是爲了辨別它的形相。『言知下』，如果說聖心『有知』，只是爲了讓人通曉它鑑照的作用，哪裡有什麼『知』的形相可以執取？『不知下』，如果說聖心『無知』，只是爲了讓人知道沒有迷惑執取的形相，豈能說它一概『無知』。
辨別形相不是爲了執著于『無』，通達鑑照不是爲了執著于『有』。不是『有』，所以『知』而『無知』；不是『無』，所以『無知』而『知』。『謂般若之體』，般若的本體無知無見，但也不是『無』，有鑑照有靈明，但也不是『有』。『非有下』，只是承接前面，解釋說明『知』與『無知』並非一也並非異也，才能夠稱之為中道之心。
因此，『知』就是『無知』，『無知』就是『知』，不要用言語（名相）來區分，而使它與聖人之心相異。『無以者』，是戒止的言辭。
提問：真諦（paramārtha-satya，最高的真理）深奧玄妙，沒有智慧無法測度，聖人的智慧正是在這裡顯現作用。法性深廣玄妙，難以思議，只有般若（prajñā，智慧）能夠證得，所以這種智慧證悟真理的功能非常顯著。
所以經中說，『不得般若，不見真諦』。這是從反面來說明。也是引用般若的含義。《大智度論》第十八卷說，解脫、涅槃（nirvāṇa，寂滅）之道都是從般若中獲得的。
真諦是般若的所緣境。通過所緣境來尋求智慧，智慧就能夠知曉真諦。』意思是說，境是心的所緣，真諦就是所證悟的境界，智慧就是能證悟的心。
【English Translation】 English version: The heart of a sage is subtle and without form, so it cannot be said to exist; when used, it fills everything (Maitreya, the future Buddha), so it cannot be said not to exist. Because it cannot be said not to exist, the wisdom of the sage resides within it; because it cannot be said to exist, names and teachings cannot describe it. 'Subtle, etc.,' means that the heart of a sage is far from knowledge, views, and the appearance of creating conditions, so it is not 'existence.' 'When used,' the sage's mind is spiritually bright, illuminating truth and understanding affairs, and its use is without ceasing, so it is not 'non-existence.' This is also similar to Lao Tzu's thought. Since it is said 'subtly without all forms,' names and teachings cannot interpret it, and cannot understand it. The previous difficulty was in using names to seek things, and things cannot be hidden. Now, prajñā (wisdom) is not a thing, so what is the basis for establishing names? Do you want to define the heart of a sage with 'having knowledge' or 'not having knowledge'? The thirty-seventh volume of the Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra says that all the world is attached to views of 'existence' and 'non-existence,' etc.
Therefore, saying 'knowing' is not to be attached to 'knowing,' but to understand its function of discernment; saying 'not knowing' is not to be attached to 'not knowing,' but to distinguish its form. 'Saying knowing below,' if it is said that the sage's heart 'has knowledge,' it is only to make people understand its function of discernment, where is there any form of 'knowing' that can be grasped? 'Saying not knowing below,' if it is said that the sage's heart 'does not know,' it is only to let people know that there is no form of delusion to grasp, how can it be said that it is entirely 'without knowledge'?
Distinguishing forms is not to be attached to 'non-existence,' understanding discernment is not to be attached to 'existence.' It is not 'existence,' therefore 'knowing' yet 'not knowing'; it is not 'non-existence,' therefore 'not knowing' yet 'knowing.' 'The essence of prajñā,' the essence of prajñā is without knowledge and without seeing, but it is also not 'non-existence,' it has discernment and spiritual brightness, but it is also not 'existence.' 'Not existence below,' it only follows the previous, explaining that 'knowing' and 'not knowing' are neither the same nor different, only then can it be called the heart of the Middle Way.
Therefore, 'knowing' is 'not knowing,' 'not knowing' is 'knowing,' do not use words (names) to distinguish them, and make it different from the heart of a sage. 'Without using,' is a word of prohibition.
Question: The true reality (paramārtha-satya, the highest truth) is profound and mysterious, and cannot be measured without wisdom, and the wisdom of the sage is manifested here. The nature of Dharma is deep, vast, and mysterious, and difficult to conceive, only prajñā (wisdom) can realize it, so the function of this wisdom to realize the truth is very significant.
Therefore, the sutra says, 'Without obtaining prajñā, one cannot see the true reality.' This is to explain from the opposite side. It also quotes the meaning of prajñā. The eighteenth volume of the Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra says that the path of liberation and nirvāṇa (extinction) are all obtained from prajñā.
True reality is the object of prajñā. By seeking wisdom through the object, wisdom can know the true reality.' The meaning is that the object is the object of the mind, and true reality is the state that is realized, and wisdom is the mind that can realize it.
。當證理時寧不知邪。
答曰。以緣求智智非知也 上句順難縱之。下句總斷非知。此但斷定非知。下釋不知之所以云。
何者。放光云。不緣色生識。是名不見色。又云。五陰清凈故般若清凈 文即大品義同放光。十六云。不以五陰因緣起識者。是為不見五陰。又云。下即放光第十四文。謂不以五陰為緣。而生般若知識。是名不見者。成無知也。以色即空故智無所得。
般若即能知也。五陰即所知也。所知即緣也 但釋後文。前亦例解。經雖云色意在色空。空與清凈義非異也。欲明真諦無相故。非是般若發知之緣。今且對前問以所知為緣。然後真妄對辨。究竟即顯真諦非緣真智非知。委細開示令人深悟。善巧方便其在於斯。遺民云。宛轉窮盡極于精巧。可謂知言矣。
夫知(心)與所知(境)相與(待)而有相與而無 初句通標。次句妄心妄境相待而起。后句真心真境相待而無。廣如下釋。
相與而無故物莫之有(真)相與而有故物莫之無(妄)物莫之無。故為緣之所起(妄)物莫之有故。則緣所不能生(真)物者通屬真妄心境 初二句躡前。相因顯真心真境寂然無相。后物莫之有下躡前無相。以明真心真境互非緣互非起。以第一義諦空慧雙融本非心境。要人悟入一體義分。空即寂
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：當證悟真理的時候，難道不知道嗎？
回答說：以因緣來尋求智慧，智慧並非能知之物。』上句是順著對方的詰難而姑且承認，下句則總括否定了智慧的能知性。這裡只是斷定智慧並非能知，下面解釋不知的原因，說：
《放光經》說：『不以色為緣而生起識，這叫做不見色。』又說：『五陰清凈的緣故，般若也清凈。』文句出自《大品般若經》，意義與《放光經》相同。《十六品》說：『不以五陰因緣而生起識，這叫做不見五陰。』又說：下面引用的就是《放光經》第十四品的文句，意思是說不以五陰為因緣，而生起般若知識，這叫做不見，成就了無知。因為色即是空，所以智慧無所得。
般若即是能知，五陰即是所知，所知即是緣。』這裡只是解釋後面的文句，前面的文句也可以依此類推來理解。經文雖然說色，但意在色空。空與清凈的意義沒有差別。想要闡明真諦無相的緣故，所以不是般若生起知見的因緣。現在姑且針對前面的提問，以所知作為因緣，然後真妄相對辨析，最終就能夠顯明真諦並非因緣，真智並非能知。詳細地開示，使人深刻領悟，善巧方便就在於此。遺民說：『委婉曲折，窮盡到了精巧的地步。』可以說是深知言語的含義了。
知（心）與所知（境）相互依存而有，相互依存而無。』第一句總括標明，第二句說的是妄心妄境相互依存而生起，后一句說的是真心真境相互依存而無。詳細的解釋如下：
相互依存而無，所以事物沒有自性（真）；相互依存而有，所以事物沒有不是存在的（妄）。事物沒有不是存在的，所以為因緣所生起（妄）；事物沒有自性，所以因緣不能生起（真）。事物，是通指真妄心境。』最初的兩句承接前文，相互依存顯明真心真境寂然無相。後面的『事物沒有自性』承接前面的無相，用以說明真心真境相互之間不是因緣，相互之間不是生起。以第一義諦空慧雙融，本來就不是心境。要人悟入一體的意義，空即是寂。
【English Translation】 English version: When realizing the truth, how can one not know?
The answer is: 'Seeking wisdom through conditions, wisdom is not something that knows.' The first sentence concedes to the challenge, while the second sentence categorically denies knowing. This only asserts that wisdom is not knowing; the reason for not knowing is explained below, saying:
The Fang Guang Jing (放光經) [Vimalakirti Sutra] says: 'Not arising consciousness based on color is called not seeing color.' It also says: 'Because the five skandhas (五陰) [form, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness] are pure, prajna (般若) [wisdom] is also pure.' The passage is from the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra (大品般若經), with the same meaning as the Fang Guang Jing. The Sixteen Sections says: 'Not arising consciousness based on the conditions of the five skandhas is called not seeing the five skandhas.' It also says: The following quote is from the fourteenth section of the Fang Guang Jing, meaning not using the five skandhas as conditions to generate prajna knowledge, which is called not seeing, resulting in non-knowing. Because form is emptiness, wisdom has nothing to be attained.
'Prajna is that which knows, and the five skandhas are that which is known; that which is known is a condition.' This only explains the latter passage; the former passage can be understood similarly. Although the sutra speaks of form, it implies the emptiness of form. The meaning of emptiness and purity are not different. Because one wants to clarify that the true reality is without characteristics, it is not a condition for prajna to generate knowledge. Now, addressing the previous question, we take that which is known as a condition, and then distinguish between truth and falsehood, ultimately revealing that true reality is not a condition, and true wisdom is not knowing. Detailed explanations are given to enable people to deeply understand, and skillful means lie in this. Yi Min (遺民) [a commentator] said: 'Subtle and thorough, exhausting the utmost ingenuity.' It can be said that he deeply understands the meaning of the words.
'Knowing (mind) and that which is known (object) exist in mutual dependence, and do not exist in mutual dependence.' The first sentence is a general statement, the second sentence speaks of the false mind and false object arising in mutual dependence, and the last sentence speaks of the true mind and true object not existing in mutual dependence. The detailed explanation is as follows:
'Because they do not exist in mutual dependence, things have no self-nature (true); because they exist in mutual dependence, there is nothing that does not exist (false). Because there is nothing that does not exist, it is arisen by conditions (false); because things have no self-nature, conditions cannot give rise to it (true). Things refer to both true and false mind and object.' The first two sentences follow the previous text, mutual dependence reveals that the true mind and true object are silent and without characteristics. The following 'things have no self-nature' follows the previous no-characteristics, to explain that the true mind and true object are not conditions for each other, and do not arise from each other. With the ultimate truth of emptiness and wisdom, they are originally not mind and object. It is necessary for people to realize the meaning of oneness, emptiness is stillness.
也。境也。慧即照也。心也。涅槃云。第一義空名為智慧。故法爾寂照湛然心境互現。性出自古實非緣生。今亦云緣者。且例妄說義言緣也。次二句躡前。相因顯妄法相待心境昭然。后物莫之無下躡前有相。以明妄心妄境互成緣互成起也。
緣所不能生故。照緣而非知(真)為緣之所起故。知緣相因而生(妄) 真非緣起故。照境之時了無分別。妄自緣生故。能所歷然。外托塵境內生分別故。云知緣等。
是以知(妄)與無知(真)生於所知矣 所知者。通屬真妄二境。妄知因境而生故云生於等。無知亦言生者。實無生相。但因真諦無相。軌則真智成無分別。生者。因也成也。
何者(通徴真妄)夫智以知所知取相故名知(妄)真諦自無相真智何由知(真) 成前相與而有相與而無。妄智以能分別所知之境。一一于境取相。相既妄起心亦妄生。真則反此。故曰無知。對妄辨真義意昭然 自下但廣釋前義。問何故真妄相因非因為緣非緣有知無知邪。
所以然者(通牒)夫所知非所知。所知生於知。所知既生知。知亦生所知 妄心妄境相因相待互各生起。心境迢然有能所知。非所知者。境未對心之時亦未為境。生於知者。由現前境牽起內心。此即因境生心。心故能知。故起信云。複次境界為緣。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『也』，指境界。『慧』，即照見。『心』，指心識。《涅槃經》說：『第一義空』名為智慧。因此，法爾如是，寂靜照見，湛然不動，心與境相互顯現。自性本自存在，並非因緣所生。現在也說因緣，只是借用妄說的意義來說因緣罷了。接下來的兩句承接前面，相互依存而顯現虛妄，法相與心境昭然分明。後面的『物莫之無』承接前面的『有相』，用來說明虛妄的心與虛妄的境相互成就因緣，相互生起。
因緣所不能生，所以照見因緣卻並非知（真），因為是因緣所生起，所以知見因緣相互依存而生（妄）。真如並非因緣生起，所以在照見境界的時候了無分別。虛妄由因緣而生，所以能與所歷歷分明。外在依託塵境，內在生起分別，所以說知見因緣等等。
因此，知（妄）與無知（真）生於所知啊。所知，普遍屬於真妄二境。虛妄的知見因為境界而生，所以說生於等等。無知也說生，實際上沒有生相，只是因為真諦無相，遵循真智而成就無分別。生，是因，是成就。
什麼（總括真妄）？智因為知見所知而取相，所以名為知（妄）。真諦本自無相，真智又從何而知（真）？成就前面所說的相互依存而有，相互依存而無。虛妄的智慧以能分別所知的境界，一一在境界上取相。相既然虛妄生起，心也虛妄生起。真如則與此相反，所以說無知。對照虛妄來辨別真如，意義昭然。下面只是廣泛解釋前面的意義。問：為什麼真妄相互依存，不是因為因，不是因為緣，有知與無知呢？
之所以這樣（總括），是因為所知非所知。所知生於知，所知既然生起知，知也生起所知。虛妄的心與虛妄的境相互依存，相互對待，各自生起。心境分明，有能知與所知。非所知，是說境界未與心相對的時候，也未成為境界。生於知，是說由現前的境界牽動內心的生起，這就是因為境界而生心，心因此能夠知見。所以《起信論》說：再次，境界為因緣。
【English Translation】 English version: 'Also,' refers to the realm. 'Wisdom' (慧, Huì), means to illuminate. 'Mind' (心, Xīn), refers to consciousness. The Nirvana Sutra says: 'The First Principle of Emptiness' is called wisdom. Therefore, it is naturally so, silent illumination, serene and unmoving, mind and realm manifest each other. The self-nature exists from ancient times and is not born of conditions. Now, when we also speak of conditions, it is merely borrowing the meaning of false speech to speak of conditions. The next two sentences follow from the previous ones, relying on each other to manifest illusion, the Dharma characteristics and the mind-realm are clearly distinct. The following 'nothing is without it' follows from the previous 'having characteristics,' to explain that the illusory mind and the illusory realm mutually accomplish conditions, mutually arise.
Conditions cannot give rise to it, so illuminating conditions is not knowing (truth), because it is what arises from conditions, so knowing conditions arises from mutual dependence (illusion). True thusness does not arise from conditions, so when illuminating the realm, there is no discrimination. Illusion arises from conditions, so the knower and the known are clearly distinct. Externally relying on the dust realm, internally giving rise to discrimination, so it is said to know conditions, etc.
Therefore, knowing (illusion) and not knowing (truth) arise from what is known. What is known universally belongs to both true and false realms. Illusory knowing arises because of the realm, so it is said to arise from, etc. When not knowing is also said to arise, in reality, there is no arising, but because true thusness is without characteristics, following true wisdom, it achieves non-discrimination. Arising is the cause, is the accomplishment.
What (generally questioning truth and illusion)? Wisdom takes on characteristics because it knows what is known, so it is called knowing (illusion). True thusness is originally without characteristics, so how can true wisdom know it (truth)? It accomplishes what was said earlier, mutually dependent and existing, mutually dependent and not existing. Illusory wisdom uses its ability to discriminate the realm of what is known, taking on characteristics in each and every realm. Since characteristics arise falsely, the mind also arises falsely. True thusness is the opposite of this, so it is called not knowing. Contrasting illusion to distinguish true thusness, the meaning is clear. Below is just a broad explanation of the previous meaning. Question: Why do truth and illusion rely on each other, not because of cause, not because of conditions, having knowing and not knowing?
The reason for this (general statement) is that what is known is not what is known. What is known arises from knowing, and since what is known arises from knowing, knowing also arises from what is known. Illusory mind and illusory realm rely on each other, treat each other, and each arises. Mind and realm are distinct, there is the knower and the known. Not what is known means that when the realm is not facing the mind, it has not yet become a realm. Arising from knowing means that the present realm stirs up the arising of the inner mind, which is because the realm gives rise to the mind, and the mind is therefore able to know. Therefore, the Awakening of Faith says: Furthermore, the realm is the condition.
故生六種相。即六粗事識分別取著。是名知也。知亦生所知者。謂因心生境也。由心分別境亦隨生。知者。分別也。古德云。未有無心境曾無無境心。
所知既相生。相生即緣法。緣法故非真。非真故。非真諦也 初句躡前。文簡。具云。知與所知等。緣法者。若心若境皆因緣所生法也。非真者。緣集故有緣離故無。自無主宰故成空假。中論云。因緣所生法我說即是空等。
故中觀云。物從因緣有故不真。不從因緣有故即真 亦義引彼論破因緣品中之義。但前句證前後句證后。
今真諦曰真。真則非緣。真非緣故。無物從緣而生也 初二句明真諦非緣集之境。后二句承前以明非緣。文亦或脫。應云無物從非緣而生也。下引證中可見。
故經云。不見有法無緣而生 大品云。亦諸經通義。未曾見有一法從非緣而生。無者。非也。如水土是生谷之緣。火石則非。今真諦如空有知如芽種。空不生芽空非緣故。緣真不生知真非緣故。中論云。不從非緣生。亦可無者有無之無。謂但見諸法賴緣而起。未有一法無緣而生。今真諦無緣性。亦不能生般若之知。中論初捲雲。如諸佛所說真實微妙法。於此無緣法。云何有緣緣。
是以真智觀真諦。未嘗取所知。智不取所知。此智何由知 初二句明不取。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 因此產生了六種相。即六種粗顯的事識分別取著。這被稱為『知』（認知）。知也產生所知者（被認知的事物），意思是因心而產生境界。由於心分別境界，境界也隨之產生。知，就是分別。古德說：『未有無心之境，曾無無境之心。』 所知既然相互產生，相互產生即是緣法（因緣和合的法則）。因為是緣法，所以不是真（真實不變的）。因為不是真，所以不是真諦（究竟真實的道理）。』第一句承接前文，文字簡略，完整地說應該是『知與所知』等。緣法，指的是無論是心還是境界，都是因緣所生的法。非真，是因為因緣聚合而有，因緣離散而無。自身沒有主宰，所以是空假。中觀論說：『因緣所生法，我說即是空』等。 所以《中觀論》說：『事物從因緣而有，所以不是真；不從因緣而有，那就是真。』這也是引用《中觀論》破因緣品中的意義。但前一句是用來證明前者的，后一句是用來證明後者的。 現在真諦說真，真就不是緣（因緣）。真不是緣的緣故，就沒有事物是從因緣而生的。』前兩句說明真諦不是因緣聚合的境界。后兩句承接前文來說明不是因緣。文字或許有脫漏，應該說『沒有事物是從非緣而生的』。從下面引用的經文可以看出。 所以經中說：『不見有法無緣而生。』《大品般若經》說，這也是諸經通用的意義，『未曾見有一法從非緣而生。』無，就是非。比如水土是產生穀物的因緣，火石就不是。現在真諦就像空，有知就像芽種。空不產生芽，因為空不是緣的緣故。緣真不產生知，因為真不是緣的緣故。《中觀論》說：『不從非緣生。』也可以理解為有無的無，意思是隻看到諸法依賴因緣而生起，沒有一法不是依賴因緣而生起的。現在真諦沒有緣性，也不能產生般若的智慧。《中觀論》初卷說：『如諸佛所說真實微妙法，於此無緣法，云何有緣緣。』 因此，真智（真實的智慧）觀照真諦，未曾執取所知（被認知的事物）。智慧不執取所知，這智慧又從何而知呢？』前兩句說明不執取。
【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, six aspects arise. These are the six coarse aspects of consciousness: discrimination, attachment, and grasping. This is called 'knowing' (cognition). Knowing also gives rise to the known (the object of cognition), meaning that a realm arises from the mind. Because the mind discriminates the realm, the realm also arises accordingly. Knowing is discrimination. An ancient master said: 'There has never been a realm without mind, nor has there ever been a mind without a realm.' Since the known arises mutually, mutual arising is dependent origination (the law of conditioned arising). Because it is dependent origination, it is not true (real and unchanging). Because it is not true, it is not the true reality (ultimate truth).』 The first sentence connects to the previous text, and the wording is concise. To say it completely, it should be 'knowing and the known,' etc. Dependent origination refers to both the mind and the realm being phenomena arising from conditions. Not true means that it exists due to the aggregation of conditions and ceases to exist when conditions disperse. Lacking self-mastery, it becomes empty and provisional. The Madhyamaka-karika (Treatise on the Middle Way) says: 'Phenomena arising from conditions, I say, are empty,' etc. Therefore, the Madhyamaka-karika says: 'Things exist from conditions, so they are not true; if they do not exist from conditions, then they are true.' This also quotes the meaning from the chapter on refuting conditions in the Madhyamaka-karika. However, the first sentence is used to prove the former, and the latter sentence is used to prove the latter. Now, Paramārtha (the ultimate truth) says that truth is not a condition (cause). Because truth is not a condition, no thing arises from conditions.』 The first two sentences explain that the ultimate truth is not a realm of aggregated conditions. The latter two sentences follow the previous text to explain that it is not a condition. The wording may be incomplete; it should say, 'No thing arises from non-conditions.' This can be seen from the scripture quoted below. Therefore, the sutra says: 'It is not seen that any dharma arises without conditions.' The Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra (Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra) says that this is also the common meaning of all sutras: 'It has never been seen that any dharma arises from non-conditions.' 'Without' means 'not.' For example, water and soil are the conditions for producing grain, while fire and stone are not. Now, the ultimate truth is like emptiness, and knowing is like a sprout. Emptiness does not produce a sprout because emptiness is not a condition. Conditioning the truth does not produce knowing because truth is not a condition. The Madhyamaka-karika says: 'It does not arise from non-conditions.' It can also be understood as the 'without' of existence and non-existence, meaning that one only sees that all dharmas arise depending on conditions, and there is not a single dharma that does not arise depending on conditions. Now, the ultimate truth has no conditional nature and cannot produce the wisdom of prajna (transcendental wisdom). The first chapter of the Madhyamaka-karika says: 'Like the true and subtle dharma spoken by all Buddhas, how can there be conditions for this unconditioned dharma?' Therefore, true wisdom (satya-jñāna) contemplates the ultimate truth (Paramārtha), never grasping the known (the object of cognition). If wisdom does not grasp the known, from where does this wisdom know?』 The first two sentences explain non-grasping.
后二句顯非知。真智觀真。若取所知豈成真智。故永嘉大師云。若以知知寂此非無緣知。如手執如意。非無如意手。若此則能所宛然。不唯不成於真智。亦不能證寂。問若竟無知何名般若。亦應不名見道答。
然智非無知。但真諦非所知。故真智亦非知 有所則有能。今所觀真諦離心緣相。故能照般若都無知相。誰謂般若絕於靈照。
而子欲以緣求智。故以智為知(舉難)緣自非緣。于(向)何而求知哉(反責) 已上唯約實智照真。真既非緣智亦非知。中吳集云。上三重問答通辨論旨。下之六重皆次第躡跡而生。
難曰。論云不取者。為無知故不取。為知然後不取邪 設爾何失。
若無知故不取。聖人則冥。若夜遊不辨緇素之異。若知然後不取。知則異於不取矣 二俱有過也。此躡前為難。謂不取順於無知。應合聖心冥暗。如人夜行不辨黑白。有取與知相順。焉有知而不取。以難前云未嘗取所知。又云智非無如。
答曰。非無知故不取。又非知然後不取 雙非。
知即不取故。能不取而知 了了妙存。故曰知。分別已亡故。曰不取。故能下正由遍計久空無明永盡。無能取相也。知由不取取則不知。故云不取而知。若此尚非自知。況取境邪。如永嘉云。若以自知知亦非無緣知。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 后兩句明顯不是真智的體現。真正的智慧是觀照真如實相。如果執取所知之境，又怎能成就真正的智慧呢？所以永嘉大師說：『如果用能知的知去了解寂滅，這並非沒有能知的知，就像手裡拿著如意，並非沒有拿著如意的手。』如果這樣，能知和所知仍然分明，不僅不能成就真智，也不能證得寂滅。問：如果完全沒有知，那還叫什麼般若？也應該不能稱為見道吧？答： 然而，智慧並非沒有知，只是真諦不是所能知的對象。所以真正的智慧也不是一種知。有所知，就會有能知。現在所觀照的真諦，是遠離心識攀緣的。所以能照的般若，完全沒有知的相狀。誰說般若斷絕了靈明的照用呢？ 而你想要用攀緣之心來尋求智慧，所以把智慧當成了一種知（提出疑問）。攀緣本身就不是真緣，又向哪裡去求知呢？（反駁）以上只是就實智照真如來說，真如既然不是攀緣的對象，智慧也不是一種知。《中吳集》說：『上面三重問答，是通盤辨明論旨。下面的六重問答，都是依次順著前面的思路而產生。』 難：論中說『不取』，是因為沒有知所以不取，還是因為有了知然後不取呢？假設哪一種情況會有什麼過失呢？ 如果因為沒有知所以不取，聖人就如同冥昧無知，像在夜晚行走的人，不能分辨黑色和白色。如果因為有了知然後不取，那麼知就和不取相矛盾了（兩種情況都有過失）。這是承接前面的話提出疑問，認為不取順應于無知，應該和聖人的心境冥暗相合，就像人在夜晚行走，不能分辨黑白。有取與知是相順的，怎麼會有知而不取的情況呢？以此來質疑前面所說的『未嘗取所知』，又說『智非無如』。 答：不是因為沒有知所以不取，也不是因為有了知然後不取（雙重否定）。 知就是不取，所以能不取而知（清清楚楚地存在）。所以說『知』，是因為分別心已經消失，所以說『不取』。因此，能不取而知，正是因為遍計所執的虛妄分別早已空盡，無明也永遠斷盡，沒有能取之相。知是因為不取，如果取著，就不能知了。所以說不取而知。如果這樣尚且不能自知，更何況是取境呢？就像永嘉大師所說：『如果用自知去了解自知，這並非沒有能知的知。』
【English Translation】 English version The last two sentences clearly do not manifest true wisdom. True wisdom contemplates true suchness (真如實相, zhēn rú shí xiàng, the true nature of reality). If one clings to what is known, how can one attain true wisdom? Therefore, Great Master Yongjia (永嘉大師, Yǒngjiā Dàshī) said: 'If one uses knowing to know stillness, this is not without a knowing. It's like holding a wish-fulfilling jewel (如意, rú yì, a scepter symbolizing power and good fortune) in hand; it's not without a hand holding the wish-fulfilling jewel.' If this is the case, the knower and the known are still distinct, and not only will true wisdom not be attained, but neither will stillness be realized. Question: If there is completely no knowing, what is it called Prajna (般若, bō rě, wisdom)? It should also not be called seeing the Path (見道, jiàn dào, the initial realization of emptiness). Answer: However, wisdom is not without knowing, but true reality (真諦, zhēn dì, ultimate truth) is not an object to be known. Therefore, true wisdom is also not a knowing. If there is something known, there will be a knower. Now, the true reality that is contemplated is apart from the mind's clinging to characteristics. Therefore, the Prajna that illuminates has no appearance of knowing. Who says that Prajna cuts off luminous awareness (靈照, líng zhào, spiritual illumination)? And you want to seek wisdom through clinging, so you regard wisdom as a knowing (raising a question). Clinging itself is not true connection, so where do you seek knowing? (rebuttal) The above only speaks of true wisdom illuminating reality. Since reality is not an object of clinging, wisdom is also not a knowing. The Zhong Wu Collection (中吳集, Zhōng Wú Jí) says: 'The above three questions and answers comprehensively clarify the main point. The following six questions and answers all arise sequentially, following the previous line of thought.' Objection: The treatise says 'not grasping.' Is it not grasping because of no knowing, or is it knowing and then not grasping? What fault would there be in either case? If it is not grasping because of no knowing, then the sage would be in darkness, like a person walking at night who cannot distinguish black from white. If it is knowing and then not grasping, then knowing is different from not grasping (both cases have faults). This follows up on the previous statement to raise a difficulty, arguing that not grasping accords with no knowing, and should be in accord with the sage's mind being in darkness, like a person walking at night who cannot distinguish black and white. Grasping and knowing are in accord, so how can there be knowing without grasping? This is to question the previous statement that 'never grasping what is known,' and also says 'wisdom is not without suchness.' Answer: It is not not grasping because of no knowing, nor is it knowing and then not grasping (double negation). Knowing is not grasping, therefore one can not grasp and know (clearly and wonderfully present). Therefore, it is said 'knowing' because discriminating thought has already disappeared, so it is said 'not grasping.' Therefore, being able to not grasp and know is precisely because the falsely imputed (遍計所執, biàn jì suǒ zhí, the imagined nature) is long empty, and ignorance (無明, wú míng, ignorance) is forever exhausted, with no appearance of grasping. Knowing is because of not grasping; if one grasps, one cannot know. Therefore, it is said not grasping and knowing. If even this is not self-knowing, how much less so is grasping at objects? As Yongjia said: 'If one uses self-knowing to know self-knowing, this is not without a knowing.'
如手自作拳。非是不拳手。
難曰。論云不取者。誠以聖心不物(取)於物。故無惑取也 不取之中含有二難。前約知與不取兩違。此約不取斷滅故二難成異。不取於物者。謂了物本空無我無法。無惑取者。謂二執二障永已斷滅。
無取則無是。無是則無當。誰當聖心。而云聖心無所不知邪 是者。印可於物不謬之稱。當者。印物不謬有主質之。謂若心有取。則定有是物之懷。有是物之懷。則有當物主質之心。今既不取。應無印可之是。當物之主。體用頓絕空空如也。故云誰當等。
答曰。然無是無當者。夫無當則物無不當。無是則物無不是。物無不是故。是而無是。物無不當故。當而無當 有當有是則屬惑取。求當求是。終不得其真是真當。今般若之照。由無惑取是當之情。故能無物不印。印無不是是無不當。豈云一向無是淪其心用。一向無當喪其心主乎。物無不是下謂正是當時。復無是當之相少法當懷。此亦無知即知。知即無知中。一分之義矣。
故經云。盡見諸法而無所見 義引放光等文。彼第十云。菩薩行般若波羅蜜。盡知一切眾生之意等。第三又云。行般若波羅蜜。于諸法無所見等。
難曰。聖心非不能是。誠以無是可是 非不下心能了境。無是下境相既空。是念亦寂。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 比如手自己握成拳頭。並非沒有手，就不能有拳頭。
提問：論中說『不取』，確實是因為聖人的心不執著于外物，所以沒有迷惑和執取。『不取』之中包含兩種詰難。前面是關於『知』與『不取』兩者相違背的詰難，這裡是關於『不取』會導致斷滅的詰難，所以這兩種詰難是不同的。『不取於物』，是指了解事物本性是空，沒有我，沒有法。『無惑取者』，是指兩種執著和兩種障礙永遠斷滅。
沒有執取就沒有『是』，沒有『是』就沒有『當』，誰來擔當聖人的心呢？怎麼能說聖人的心一無所知呢？『是』，是指認可事物沒有謬誤的稱謂。『當』，是指認可事物沒有謬誤，並且有主宰的性質。如果心中有執取，就一定會有認為是某種事物的想法；有了認為是某種事物的想法，就會有主宰這種事物的心。現在既然沒有執取，就應該沒有認可的『是』，沒有主宰事物的主宰，本體和作用都完全斷絕，空空如也。所以說『誰當』等等。
回答：雖然沒有『是』沒有『當』，但沒有『當』就沒有什麼事物不『當』，沒有『是』就沒有什麼事物不『是』。事物沒有不『是』的，所以『是』而無『是』；事物沒有不『當』的，所以『當』而無『當』。有『當』有『是』就屬於迷惑和執取，追求『當』追求『是』，最終無法得到它們的真實面目。現在般若的照耀，由於沒有迷惑和執取『是』和『當』的情感，所以能夠沒有事物不被印證，印證沒有不是『是』的，沒有不『當』的。難道說是一味地沒有『是』，從而喪失了心的作用；一味地沒有『當』，從而喪失了心的主宰嗎？『物無不是』以下是說正在當時，又沒有『是』和『當』的表象，沒有絲毫的法可以執著。這也是無知即知，知即無知中的一部分含義。
所以經中說：『完全見到諸法，卻沒有任何所見。』
提問：聖人的心並非不能認為是，確實是因為沒有『是』才可以認為是。並非是心不能瞭解境界，而是因為沒有『是』，境界的相已經空了，『是』的念頭也寂靜了。
【English Translation】 English version It is like a hand forming a fist by itself. It is not that without a hand, there cannot be a fist.
Objection: The treatise says 'non-grasping' because the sage's mind does not cling to things, hence there is no delusion or grasping. 'Non-grasping' contains two difficulties. The previous one concerns the contradiction between 'knowing' and 'non-grasping,' while this one concerns the difficulty that 'non-grasping' leads to annihilation, so these two difficulties are different. 'Non-grasping of things' means understanding that the nature of things is empty, without self, without dharma. 'No delusion or grasping' means that the two attachments and two obstacles are forever cut off.
Without grasping, there is no 'is'; without 'is,' there is no 'should be.' Who can bear the sage's mind? How can it be said that the sage's mind knows nothing?
'Is' refers to the affirmation of things without error. 'Should be' refers to the affirmation of things without error and having a presiding nature. If the mind has grasping, it will certainly have the thought of considering something as a certain thing; if there is the thought of considering something as a certain thing, there will be the mind of presiding over this thing. Now that there is no grasping, there should be no affirmation of 'is,' no presiding over things, the substance and function are completely cut off, empty and void. Therefore, it is said 'Who can bear,' and so on.
Answer: Although there is no 'is' and no 'should be,' without 'should be,' there is nothing that is not 'should be'; without 'is,' there is nothing that is not 'is.' Things are not not 'is,' so 'is' without 'is'; things are not not 'should be,' so 'should be' without 'should be.' Having 'should be' and 'is' belongs to delusion and grasping, seeking 'should be' and seeking 'is' ultimately cannot obtain their true nature. Now, the illumination of Prajna, because there is no delusion and grasping of the emotions of 'is' and 'should be,' can affirm everything without exception, affirming that there is nothing that is not 'is,' nothing that is not 'should be.' Is it said that it is simply without 'is,' thereby losing the function of the mind; simply without 'should be,' thereby losing the mastery of the mind? 'Things are not not is' below means that it is precisely at that time, and there is no appearance of 'is' and 'should be,' without the slightest dharma to cling to. This is also a part of the meaning of 'no knowing is knowing, knowing is no knowing.'
Therefore, the sutra says: 'Completely seeing all dharmas, yet having no seeing.'
Objection: The sage's mind is not incapable of considering 'is,' it is precisely because there is no 'is' that it can be considered 'is.' It is not that the mind cannot understand the realm, but because there is no 'is,' the appearance of the realm is already empty, and the thought of 'is' is also silent.
雖無是可是(縱成)故當(應)是于無是矣 境空心寂不可有是有當。無是無當應可住乎。
是以經云。真諦無相故般若無知者。誠以般若無有有相之知。若以無相為無相。又何累(去聲)于真諦邪 因前抉擇。已舍有知之念。故云無有有相之知。復取無相為是。故云。若以無相為無相等。為者。取著之相。累謂負累。亦罪也。意云。真諦無相般若無知心境俱無。住此無中如何。
答曰。聖人無無相也 舉聖總遣。
何者(徴)若以無相為無相。無相即為相 無相雖無。若心有所住即為相矣。焉成無相。智論二十六云。若無相中取相非是無相。學般若者。住有為有火燒。住無為無水沈。水火雖殊滅身無異。若有無俱舍中道不存。是謂住于無所住矣。
舍有而之(往)無。譬猶逃峰而赴壑。俱不免於患矣 避有住無。猶如一人患危峰險峻。翻身赴于溝壑。不知溝壑墜墮亦可傷身。故中論云。大聖說空法為離諸見故。若復見有空諸佛所不化。以著有之見易除。著空之見難治。如火出水中病因藥起。
是以至人處有不有居無不無。雖不取于有無。然亦不捨于有無 處有下二句謂常居有無了無所住。亦不起有無之見。雖不下二句縱成前後不取不離。真無住之般若也。
所以和光塵
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 即使沒有『是』或『可』（縱然成立），也應當認為它等同於『無是』。境界空寂，內心寂靜，不可執著于『有』，也不可執著于『當』。如果既不執著于『無是』，也不執著于『無當』，那麼應該安住於何處呢？
因此經書上說：『真諦（paramārtha-satya，佛教術語，指最高的真理）沒有相，所以般若（prajñā，智慧）沒有知。』確實是因為般若沒有執著于『有相』的知。如果把『無相』當作『無相』來執著，那又何必增加對真諦的束縛呢？因為之前的決斷和選擇，已經捨棄了執著于『有知』的念頭，所以說沒有執著于『有相』的知。如果又執取『無相』作為正確的，所以說『如果把無相當作無相等』。『為』的意思是執取和著相。『累』的意思是負擔和拖累，也是罪過。意思是說，真諦沒有相，般若沒有知，心和境界都空無，安住于這種空無之中又如何呢？
回答說：聖人（ārya，指證悟者）並沒有執著于『無相』。這裡用『聖人』一詞來總括，是爲了遣除一切執著。
為什麼呢？（提問）如果把『無相』當作『無相』來執著，那麼『無相』就變成了『相』。無相雖然是空無的，如果內心有所執住，那就變成了『相』。又怎麼能成就『無相』呢？《大智度論》第二十六卷說：『如果在無相中取相，那就不是無相。』學習般若的人，執著于『有為』就像被火燒，執著于『無為』就像被水淹。水和火雖然不同，但都會毀滅身軀。如果『有』和『無』都捨棄，中道（madhyamāpratipad，不偏不倚的道路）才能存在。這就是安住于無所住之處。
捨棄『有』而趨向『無』，好比逃離山峰卻跳入深谷，都不能免除禍患。逃避『有』而執著于『無』，就像一個人害怕高聳的山峰，轉身跳入溝壑。卻不知道墜入溝壑也可能受傷。所以《中論》說：『大聖（指佛陀）說空法，是爲了遠離各種見解。如果又執著于空，諸佛也無法度化。』因為執著于『有』的見解容易去除，而執著于『空』的見解難以醫治，就像火從水中冒出來，疾病因藥物而起。
因此，達到最高境界的人，處於『有』而不執著于『有』，居於『無』而不執著于『無』。雖然不執取于『有』和『無』，但也並不捨棄『有』和『無』。處於『有』和『無』而不執著于『有』和『無』，是指常常處於『有』和『無』的狀態，內心卻沒有任何執著，也不生起『有』和『無』的見解。雖然不執取也不捨棄，縱然成立，前後都不執取不捨棄，才是真正無所住的般若。
所以要和光同塵（與世俗相融合）……
【English Translation】 English version: Even if there is no 'is' or 'can be' (even if it is established), it should be considered equivalent to 'no is'. The realm is empty and silent, the mind is tranquil, one should not cling to 'being' (existence), nor should one cling to 'should be'. If one clings neither to 'no is' nor to 'no should be', then where should one abide?
Therefore, the scriptures say: 'The true reality (paramārtha-satya) has no form, therefore prajñā (wisdom) has no knowing.' Indeed, it is because prajñā has no knowing that clings to 'having form'. If one clings to 'no form' as 'no form', then why add bondage to the true reality? Because of the previous determination and choice, the thought of clinging to 'having knowing' has already been abandoned, so it is said that there is no knowing that clings to 'having form'. If one then clings to 'no form' as correct, so it is said 'If one takes no form as no form, etc.' 'Takes' means clinging and attachment. 'Bondage' means burden and encumbrance, and also sin. The meaning is that the true reality has no form, prajñā has no knowing, the mind and realm are both empty, so how is it to abide in this emptiness?
The answer is: The sage (ārya) does not cling to 'no form'. Here, the term 'sage' is used to encompass everything, in order to eliminate all attachments.
Why? (Question) If one clings to 'no form' as 'no form', then 'no form' becomes 'form'. Although no form is empty, if the mind has something to cling to, then it becomes 'form'. How can one achieve 'no form'? The twenty-sixth volume of the Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra says: 'If one takes form in no form, then it is not no form.' Those who study prajñā, clinging to 'conditioned' is like being burned by fire, clinging to 'unconditioned' is like being drowned by water. Although water and fire are different, they both destroy the body. If both 'being' and 'non-being' are abandoned, the Middle Way (madhyamāpratipad) can exist. This is called abiding in the place of no abiding.
Abandoning 'being' and going to 'non-being' is like escaping a mountain peak but jumping into a ravine, neither can avoid disaster. Escaping 'being' and clinging to 'non-being' is like a person fearing a towering mountain peak and turning to jump into a ravine. But not knowing that falling into a ravine can also be harmful. Therefore, the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā says: 'The Great Sage (referring to the Buddha) taught the Dharma of emptiness in order to be free from all views. If one clings to emptiness again, the Buddhas cannot transform them.' Because the view of clinging to 'being' is easy to remove, while the view of clinging to 'emptiness' is difficult to cure, like fire coming out of water, and disease arising from medicine.
Therefore, those who reach the highest state, are in 'being' without clinging to 'being', and dwell in 'non-being' without clinging to 'non-being'. Although they do not cling to 'being' and 'non-being', they also do not abandon 'being' and 'non-being'. Being in 'being' and 'non-being' without clinging to 'being' and 'non-being' means often being in the state of 'being' and 'non-being', but without any attachment in the heart, and without arising the views of 'being' and 'non-being'. Although not clinging nor abandoning, even if it is established, neither clinging nor abandoning before and after, is the true prajñā of no abiding.
Therefore, one should harmonize with the light and mingle with the dust (blend in with the world)...
勞周旋五趣。寂然而往怕爾而來。恬淡無為而無所不為 此約悲智相導。以顯無住。初句文同老氏。彼云。和其光同其塵。今借彼文以明權智涉有化生。周旋者。謂周遍迴旋也。往者。往五趣故即靜而動也。來者。復涅槃故即動而靜也。謂不出生死恒復涅槃。了知生涅無二際故。寂然怕爾恬淡義皆相似意云以。悲導智而往五趣。周遍化生無所不為。然正方便時。智即導悲。見生界空度無所度。故言怕爾而來恬淡無為。此如宗中悲智相導一念之力。權慧兩具處說。
難曰。聖心雖無知。然其應會之道不差。是以可應者應之。不可應者存之 此難權智生滅。先立理也。因前辨析已許二智不住有無。然其下權智應機之時。大小無差。機熟為可應。未熟者與作得度之緣。故云存之。
然則聖心有時而生。有時而滅。可得然乎 正難也。謂應時新生感謝息滅。許如此不。
答曰。生滅者。生滅心也。聖人無心生滅焉起 前二句明妄。謂諸心心所實托緣生。從因緣故墮在生滅。聖心反此。謂三際已破四相兼亡。剎那不萌。何容生滅邪。問若爾應無心邪。下通云。
然非無心。但是無心心耳。又非不應。但是不應應耳 華嚴明佛智廣大。金光談如智獨存。豈曰默然如空無知無照。無心心者。一非妄有故。二
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：周旋於五趣（地獄、餓鬼、畜生、人、天），寂然離去又恐你到來。恬淡無為卻又無所不為——這是用悲智相互引導，來彰顯無住的道理。第一句的文辭與老子的思想相似，老子說：『和其光，同其塵。』現在借用他的文辭來闡明權智涉入世間教化眾生。『周旋』，是說周遍迴旋。『往』，是前往五趣，是靜止中的運動。『來』，是迴歸涅槃，是運動中的靜止。意思是說，不出生死，恒常回歸涅槃，了知生死與涅槃沒有兩個界限。『寂然』、『怕爾』、『恬淡』，意義都相似，意思是說用悲心引導智慧，前往五趣，周遍教化眾生，無所不為。然而在真正運用方便法門時，智慧又引導悲心，見到眾生界本空，沒有誰被度化。所以說『怕爾而來，恬淡無為』。這就像宗門中悲智相互引導，一念之力的作用，權智和慧解兩者兼備的情況。 有人問難說：聖人的心雖然沒有分別之知，但是他應機施教的道理不會有差錯，所以可以教化的就去教化，不可以教化的就暫時留存——這是質疑權智有生滅。先確立這個道理。因為前面辨析已經承認二智不住于有無，然而下面的權智應機之時，大小沒有差別。機緣成熟的就可以教化，沒有成熟的就為他創造得度的因緣，所以說『存之』。 那麼，聖人的心有時產生，有時滅亡，可以這樣認為嗎？——這是正式的質疑。意思是說，應機時新生，感應結束時息滅，可以允許這樣說嗎？ 回答說：生滅的是生滅心，聖人沒有生滅之心，哪裡會有生滅產生呢？——前面兩句說明妄心。意思是說，各種心和心所實際上是依託因緣而生，因為因緣的緣故而墮入生滅。聖人的心與此相反，意思是說，過去、現在、未來三際已經破除，生、老、病、死四相也一併消亡，剎那的念頭都不會萌生，哪裡容得下生滅呢？問：如果這樣，難道聖人就沒有心了嗎？下面解釋說： 然而並非沒有心，只是沒有妄心罷了。又並非不應機，只是不以有所作為的方式來應機罷了。——《華嚴經》闡明佛的智慧廣大，《金光明經》談到如實智獨自存在。難道是說默然如虛空，沒有知覺沒有照見嗎？『無心心』，一是並非虛妄而有，二是空寂。
【English Translation】 English version: Revolving through the five realms (hell, hungry ghosts, animals, humans, and gods), silently departing yet fearing your arrival. Tranquil and inactive, yet there is nothing that is not done—this is using compassion and wisdom to guide each other, to manifest the principle of non-abiding. The wording of the first sentence is similar to Lao Tzu's thought, who said: 'Harmonize with its light, be one with its dust.' Now, borrowing his words to clarify that expedient wisdom (upaya-jnana) intervenes in the world to transform sentient beings. 'Revolving' means revolving everywhere. 'Departing' means going to the five realms, which is movement within stillness. 'Arriving' means returning to Nirvana, which is stillness within movement. It means not being born into samsara, constantly returning to Nirvana, understanding that there are no two boundaries between samsara and Nirvana. 'Silently,' 'fearing,' and 'tranquil' have similar meanings, meaning using compassion to guide wisdom, going to the five realms, transforming sentient beings everywhere, and doing everything. However, when truly using expedient methods, wisdom guides compassion, seeing that the realm of sentient beings is inherently empty, and there is no one to be liberated. Therefore, it is said 'fearing your arrival, tranquil and inactive.' This is like the mutual guidance of compassion and wisdom in the Zen school, the function of a single thought, the situation where both expedient wisdom and understanding are present. Someone questioned: Although the heart of a sage has no discriminating knowledge, the principle of his responding to opportunities will not be wrong, so those who can be taught will be taught, and those who cannot be taught will be temporarily preserved—this questions the arising and ceasing of expedient wisdom. First establish this principle. Because the previous analysis has already admitted that the two wisdoms do not abide in existence or non-existence, however, when the following expedient wisdom responds to opportunities, there is no difference in size. Those whose conditions are ripe can be taught, and those who are not ripe will have the conditions for liberation created for them, so it is said 'preserved'. Then, does the heart of a sage sometimes arise and sometimes cease? Can it be considered this way?—This is the formal question. It means, arising when responding to opportunities, and ceasing when the response ends, can this be allowed? The answer is: What arises and ceases is the mind of arising and ceasing. The sage has no mind of arising and ceasing, where would arising and ceasing arise?—The first two sentences explain the deluded mind. It means that various minds and mental states actually rely on conditions to arise, and because of conditions, they fall into arising and ceasing. The sage's mind is the opposite of this, meaning that the three times (past, present, future) have been broken, and the four characteristics (birth, old age, sickness, death) have also disappeared, and not even a moment of thought arises, where can arising and ceasing be accommodated? Question: If so, does the sage have no mind? The following explanation says: However, it is not that there is no mind, but only that there is no deluded mind. And it is not that there is no response, but only that there is no response in a way that is contrived. —The Avatamsaka Sutra clarifies the vastness of the Buddha's wisdom, and the Golden Light Sutra speaks of the existence of true wisdom alone. Is it said that it is silent like emptiness, without knowledge or illumination? 'No-mind mind' means, first, it is not falsely existent, and second, it is empty and still.
寂而能照故。問無心之心應不應機邪。答又非不應等。后得無私但隨感而現。現無現相故云爾爾。即前云。功高不仁等。亦可即寂故。不應即照故應。以今不應之應。顯上無心之心。上體此用。
是以聖人應會之道。信若四時之質(實)直以虛無為體。斯不可得而生。不可得而滅也 大權利物。是唯無感感之必應。信若四時也。直者。正也。虛無者語借老氏。謂般若之體妙湛絕相曰虛。永盡惑取曰無。斯不下結成。賢首大師云。非生非滅四相之所不遷。謂既以至虛為性。則感來非生感謝非滅故云不可得等。
難曰。聖智之無惑智之無。俱無生滅。何以異之 此辨真妄宛殊。而云俱無。俱無則同無生滅。智惑何分。
答曰。聖智之無者無知。惑智之無者知無。其無雖同。所以無者異也 聖心無知無惑取知見等相。故惑智知無。謂妄知緣生其性本空故。其名雖同其義實異。亦猶真俗皆諦。諦義元殊。
何者。夫聖心虛靜。無知可無可曰無知。非謂知無。惑智有知。故有知可無。可謂知無。非曰無知也 謂聖心遍計已斷識相亦滅。更無妄知之體可令無之。但可稱云無知遮也。非謂知無者表也。故永嘉云。其性瞭然故不同於木石。謂覺照炳然光遍法界。豈曰知無。故荷澤云。知之一字眾妙之門。華嚴
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 寂靜而又能照見一切，所以說『寂而能照』。問：無心之心應不應該隨機應變呢？答：又不是不應變等等。后得智沒有私心，只是隨著感應而顯現。顯現而沒有顯現的相狀，所以說『爾爾』。就像前面說的，『功高不仁』等等，也可以說是即寂，因為不應就是照，所以應。用現在不應的應，來顯明上面的無心之心。上面是本體，下面是作用。 因此，聖人應世之道，真實得就像四季的本質一樣，以虛無作為本體。這樣就不可得生，不可得滅。大權示現利益眾生，這是唯有無感才能感應，必定應驗，真實得就像四季一樣。『直』就是正。『虛無』這個詞借用老子的說法，是指般若的本體，微妙湛寂，斷絕一切相狀，叫做『虛』；永遠斷盡迷惑和執取，叫做『無』。下面總結說明，賢首大師說，『非生非滅，四相都不能使它改變』。意思是說，既然以至虛為本性，那麼感應到來不是生，感謝離開不是滅，所以說『不可得』等等。 有人提問：聖智的無惑和智的無惑，都是沒有生滅的，為什麼會有不同呢？這是爲了辨別真妄的差別，而說都是沒有生滅的。如果都是沒有生滅，那麼智和惑有什麼區別呢？ 回答說：聖智的無，是無知；惑智的無，是知無。它們的『無』雖然相同，但是之所以『無』的原因是不同的。聖心沒有知，沒有迷惑，沒有執取知見等等相狀，所以惑智是知無。妄知是因緣生起的，它的本性是空，所以它的名稱雖然相同，但是它的意義實際上是不同的。就像真諦和俗諦都是諦，但是諦的意義根本不同。 為什麼呢？聖心虛空寂靜，沒有可以被去除的知，所以叫做無知，不是說知道沒有。惑智有知，所以有知可以被去除，可以叫做知無，不是說無知。聖心已經斷除了遍計所執，識相也已經滅盡，再也沒有妄知的本體可以被去除，只能稱作無知，這是遮詮。不是說知道沒有，這是表詮。所以永嘉說，『它的本性明明白白，所以不同於木頭和石頭』。意思是說覺照明顯，光明遍照法界，怎麼能說是知無呢？所以荷澤說，『知之一字，眾妙之門』。《華嚴經》
【English Translation】 English version: It is quiescent yet illuminating, hence the saying 'quiescent and illuminating'. Question: Should the mind of no-mind respond to circumstances? Answer: It's not that it doesn't respond, etc. The wisdom gained after enlightenment is without selfishness, simply manifesting according to the feeling. Manifesting without the appearance of manifestation, hence the saying 'thus, thus'. Just as previously said, 'Great merit is unkind', etc., it can also be said to be quiescent, because non-response is illumination, hence response. Using the non-response of the present to reveal the mind of no-mind above. The above is the substance, the below is the function. Therefore, the way of the sage responding to the world is as real as the essence of the four seasons, taking emptiness as its substance. Thus, it cannot be born, and it cannot be extinguished. The great power manifests to benefit sentient beings, this is only through no-feeling can there be feeling, it will surely respond, as real as the four seasons. 'Straight' means upright. The term 'emptiness' is borrowed from Laozi, referring to the substance of Prajna, subtle and still, cutting off all appearances, called 'empty'; forever exhausting delusion and attachment, called 'no'. The following concludes, Master Xianshou said, 'Neither born nor extinguished, the four characteristics cannot move it'. Meaning that since it takes ultimate emptiness as its nature, then the arrival of feeling is not birth, the departure of gratitude is not extinction, hence the saying 'cannot be obtained', etc. Question: The non-delusion of the sage's wisdom and the non-delusion of wisdom are both without birth and death, why are they different? This is to distinguish the difference between truth and falsehood, and to say that both are without birth and death. If both are without birth and death, then what is the difference between wisdom and delusion? Answer: The 'no' of the sage's wisdom is no-knowing; the 'no' of deluded wisdom is knowing-no. Although their 'no' is the same, the reason for their 'no' is different. The sage's mind has no knowing, no delusion, no attachment to views, etc., so deluded wisdom is knowing-no. Deluded knowing arises from conditions, its nature is empty, so although its name is the same, its meaning is actually different. Just as the true truth and the conventional truth are both truths, but the meaning of truth is fundamentally different. Why? The sage's mind is empty and still, there is no knowing that can be removed, so it is called no-knowing, not saying knowing-no. Deluded wisdom has knowing, so there is knowing that can be removed, it can be called knowing-no, not saying no-knowing. The sage's mind has already cut off the conceptual construction, the aspect of consciousness has also been extinguished, there is no longer a deluded knowing substance that can be removed, it can only be called no-knowing, this is negation. Not saying knowing-no, this is affirmation. Therefore, Yongjia said, 'Its nature is clear, so it is different from wood and stone'. Meaning that the awareness is clear, the light shines throughout the Dharma realm, how can it be said to be knowing-no? Therefore, Heze said, 'The word 'knowing' is the gate of all wonders'. Avatamsaka Sutra (Huayan Jing)
十首問佛境界智佛境界知。清涼釋云。知即心體智即心用。此論智知體用雙舍爾。惑智下反前可思。
無知即般若之無也。知無即真諦之無也 若妄知對於妄境。妄知亦心。今以般若照之。妄知性空即是真諦之境。如前云。五陰清凈是也。一心一境二相歷然。如何但認空同。不觀心境各異。
是以般若之與真諦。言用即同而異(初句)言寂即異而同(次句)同故無心於彼此(釋)異故不失於照功 釋前初句。
是以辨同者同於異。辨異者異於同(三俱句)斯則不可得而異。不可得而同也(四非句) 此中具有四句。但文隱難見。今具出之令無餘惑。初句承前雙標心境。為寂用同異所依之法體。心境法也。寂用義也。同異但料簡寂用爾。言心境者。即智而如境也。即如而智心也。不二而二體用恒殊。二而不二心境一觀。華嚴迴向說。未有如外智慧證於如。未有智外如為智所證。今論中言寂即如也。言用即智也。正由如智同源體用一致。故得同異自在。四句全現體用。非異曰同。非一曰異。已知大義。言用下第一句即同而異者。謂即體起用用與體殊。下躡釋云。異故不失於照功。言寂下第二句即異而同者。謂攝用歸體體與用一。下躡釋云。同故無心於彼此。彼此目心境也。是以下第三俱句。雙攬前二成
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 十首問佛境界智佛境界知（關於佛的境界智慧和佛的境界知識的十個問題）。清涼（指清涼澄觀）解釋說：『知』是心的本體，『智』是心的作用。此論（指《十首問佛境界智佛境界知》）智和知，本體和作用都捨棄了。迷惑和智慧，下面反過來思考。
『無知』就是般若（prajna，智慧）的『無』。『知無』就是真諦（paramārtha，第一義諦）的『無』。如果虛妄的知對應于虛妄的境界，虛妄的知也是心。現在用般若來照耀它，虛妄的知其自性本空，就是真諦的境界。如前面所說，五陰（pañca-skandha，構成人身的五種要素）清凈就是這個意思。一心一境，兩種相貌歷歷分明，為什麼只認為它們是空無一物呢？不觀察心和境各自不同嗎？
因此，般若與真諦，從作用上說，是相同而不同的（第一句）；從寂靜上說，是不同而相同的（第二句）。相同，所以心中沒有彼此的分別（解釋）；不同，所以不失去照的作用（解釋）。（以上）解釋了前面的第一句。
因此，辨別相同的人，是同於不同；辨別不同的人，是異於相同（第三句，俱句）。這樣，就既不能說是不同，也不能說是相同了（第四句，非句）。這裡面包含了四句，只是文字隱晦難以看清。現在全部列出來，使人不再有疑惑。第三句承接前面，同時標明心和境，作為寂和用，同和異所依賴的法體。心和境是法，寂和用是義。同和異只是對寂和用進行辨析。說到心和境，就是即智而如境，即如而智心。不二而二，體和用始終不同；二而不二，心和境可以一體觀察。《華嚴經》的迴向品說，沒有如以外的智慧證到如，沒有智以外的如為智所證。現在論中說寂就是如，說用就是智。正是由於如和智同源，體和用一致，所以才能同異自在。四句完全展現了體和用。不是異，就說是同；不是一，就說是異。已經知道了大義。說到『用』，下面的第一句『即同而異』，是說即體起用，用和體是不同的。下面緊接著解釋說：『異故不失於照功』。說到『寂』，下面的第二句『即異而同』，是說攝用歸體，體和用是一體的。下面緊接著解釋說：『同故無心於彼此』。『彼此』指的是心和境。因此，下面的第三句，同時概括了前面兩句，成為俱句。
【English Translation】 English version Ten Questions on the Realm of Buddha's Wisdom and the Realm of Buddha's Knowledge. Qingliang (referring to Qingliang Chengguan) explains: 'Knowledge' is the substance of the mind, and 'wisdom' is the function of the mind. This treatise (referring to 'Ten Questions on the Realm of Buddha's Wisdom and the Realm of Buddha's Knowledge') abandons both wisdom and knowledge, substance and function. Regarding delusion and wisdom, consider reversing the order below.
'No-knowledge' is the 'no' of prajna (wisdom). 'Knowing no' is the 'no' of paramārtha (ultimate truth). If deluded knowledge corresponds to deluded realms, deluded knowledge is also mind. Now, using prajna to illuminate it, the nature of deluded knowledge is empty, which is the realm of paramārtha. As mentioned earlier, the purity of the five skandhas (the five aggregates that constitute a person) is this meaning. One mind and one realm, two distinct appearances, why only consider them as empty? Do you not observe that the mind and the realm are different?
Therefore, prajna and paramārtha, in terms of function, are the same and different (first sentence); in terms of stillness, are different and the same (second sentence). The same, so there is no distinction of self and other in the mind (explanation); different, so the function of illumination is not lost (explanation). (The above) explains the first sentence.
Therefore, those who distinguish sameness are the same in difference; those who distinguish difference are different in sameness (third sentence, both/俱句). Thus, it cannot be said to be different, nor can it be said to be the same (fourth sentence, neither/非句). This contains four sentences, but the words are obscure and difficult to see clearly. Now, list them all to eliminate any doubts. The third sentence connects to the previous one, simultaneously marking the mind and the realm as the dharma-body on which stillness and function, sameness and difference, depend. Mind and realm are dharma, stillness and function are meaning. Sameness and difference are only analyzing stillness and function. Speaking of mind and realm, it is being wise while being like the realm, and being like while being wise of the mind. Not two but two, substance and function are always different; two but not two, mind and realm can be observed as one. The Avatamsaka Sutra's chapter on dedication says that there is no wisdom outside of suchness that can prove suchness, and there is no suchness outside of wisdom that is proven by wisdom. Now, in the treatise, stillness is suchness, and function is wisdom. It is precisely because suchness and wisdom have the same source, and substance and function are consistent, that sameness and difference can be freely used. The four sentences fully reveal substance and function. Not different, it is said to be the same; not one, it is said to be different. Having understood the great meaning. Speaking of 'function', the first sentence below, 'the same and different', means that function arises from substance, and function and substance are different. The following explanation closely follows: 'Different, so the function of illumination is not lost.' Speaking of 'stillness', the second sentence below, 'different and the same', means that function is gathered back into substance, and substance and function are one. The following explanation closely follows: 'The same, so there is no distinction of self and other in the mind.' 'Self and other' refers to mind and realm. Therefore, the third sentence below, simultaneously summarizes the previous two sentences, becoming the both/俱句.
此第三爾。是以辨同者。牒前同句。具云。是以辨異而同者。以其但同於異故。云異而同。蓋即異而同也。辨異者。牒初異句。可準前說。亦即同而異也。二句同時。斯則下第四非句承前第三而成。以同於異故非同。異於同故非異具。云不。可得乎異而同同。而異也下。寂用各辨中但敘前二句以。后二句從前生故。
何者。內有獨鑒之明。外有萬法之實。萬法雖實然非照不得。內外相與以成其照功。此則聖所不能同用也 釋前第一句。以心為內。以境為外。獨鑒者。無二之照故。萬法之實者。實謂真實。諸法實相故。又空亦名實。緣生性空故。前云。實相性空緣會一義等。上列心境。萬法下明智證。理唯甚深。般若能照蘊等皆空也。內外下謂如如之境待般若以證。亦由證境成般若之功。此則下結成異句。
內雖照而無知。外雖實而無相。內外寂然相與俱無。此則聖所不能異寂也 釋前第二句。此中內外俱無如智雙泯。寂亦不立。假彼寂同以遣其異。異既遣矣。沒同果海唯證相應。非思非議。文義可解。
是以經云。諸法不異者。豈曰續鳧截鶴。夷(平)岳(山)盈(滿)壑。然後無異哉。誠以不異於異故。雖異而不異也 初句牒經。大品遍學品云。諸法無相非一相。非異相。若修無相是修般若等。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 這第三個『爾』字，是用來說明『辨同』的。爲了呼應前面的『同』句，完整地說就是『是以辨異而同者』，因為它只是在『異』中求『同』，所以說『異而同』，實際上就是『即異而同』。『辨異者』，呼應最初的『異』句，可以參照前面的解釋，也是『即同而異』。這兩句話是同時成立的。因此，下面的第四句『非句』承接前面的第三句而成立，因為在『異』中求『同』所以『非同』，在『同』中求『異』所以『非異』。完整地說就是『不可得乎異而同，同而異也』。寂用各辨中只敘述了前兩句，因為后兩句是從前兩句生髮出來的。 何為『內有獨鑒之明，外有萬法之實』？萬法雖然真實存在，但沒有『照』就無法顯現。內外相互作用，才能成就『照』的作用。這就是聖人也無法等同使用的東西。——解釋前面的第一句。以『心』為『內』，以『境』為『外』。『獨鑒』，是沒有二元對立的照見。『萬法之實』，『實』指的是真實，諸法實相的緣故。或者說，『空』也叫做『實』，因為緣起性空。前面說，『實相、性空、緣會』是一個意思等等。上面列舉了『心』和『境』，『萬法下』說明了智慧的證悟，道理非常深奧，般若能夠照見五蘊等都是空性的。『內外下』說的是如如之境等待般若來證悟，也因為證悟了『境』才成就了般若的功用。『此則下』總結成『異句』。 何為『內雖照而無知，外雖實而無相。內外寂然相與俱無，此則聖所不能異寂也』？——解釋前面的第二句。這裡內外都空無，就像智慧和所泯滅的對象都一起消失，連『寂』也不成立。假設有『寂同』是爲了遣除『異』，『異』既然被遣除了，就沉沒在『同』的果海中，唯有證悟相應，非思非議。文義可以理解。 所以經中說：『諸法不異』，難道是說要『續鳧截鶴（比喻違背自然規律，強求一致），夷岳盈壑（削平高山，填滿深谷）』，然後才沒有差異嗎？實在是因為『不異於異』的緣故，所以雖然有差異，但實際上沒有差異。——第一句引用經典。《大品般若經·遍學品》中說：『諸法無相，非一相，非異相。若修無相，是修般若』等等。
【English Translation】 English version: This third 'er' (爾) is used to explain 'distinguishing sameness'. To echo the previous 'sameness' phrase, it is fully stated as 'therefore, distinguishing difference and sameness', because it only seeks 'sameness' within 'difference', so it is called 'different yet the same', which is actually 'being different and yet the same'. 'Distinguishing difference' echoes the initial 'difference' phrase, which can be explained by referring to the previous explanation, and is also 'being the same and yet different'. These two sentences are simultaneously valid. Therefore, the following fourth sentence, the 'non-sentence', is established by inheriting the previous third sentence, because seeking 'sameness' in 'difference' is 'not the same', and seeking 'difference' in 'sameness' is 'not different'. Fully stated, it is 'unattainable to be different and the same, the same and different'. In the separate explanations of stillness and function, only the first two sentences are narrated, because the latter two sentences are derived from the former two. What is 'internally having the clarity of solitary discernment, externally having the reality of myriad dharmas (萬法)'? Although the myriad dharmas (萬法) are truly existent, they cannot be revealed without 'illumination'. The interaction of internal and external is necessary to achieve the function of 'illumination'. This is something that even sages cannot use identically. -- Explaining the first sentence above. 'Mind' is taken as 'internal', and 'environment' as 'external'. 'Solitary discernment' is the illumination without duality. 'The reality of myriad dharmas (萬法)' refers to truth, because of the real aspect of all dharmas (諸法). Or, 'emptiness' is also called 'reality', because of dependent arising and the emptiness of nature. It was previously said that 'true aspect, emptiness of nature, and the assembly of conditions' have the same meaning, etc. Above, 'mind' and 'environment' are listed, and 'below myriad dharmas (萬法)' explains the enlightenment of wisdom, the principle is very profound, and prajna (般若) can illuminate that the five skandhas (五蘊), etc., are all empty. 'Below internal and external' refers to the suchness realm waiting for prajna (般若) to realize it, and also because of the realization of the 'realm' that the function of prajna (般若) is achieved. 'Below this then' concludes into a 'different sentence'. What is 'internally, although illuminating, there is no knowing; externally, although real, there is no form. Internally and externally, stillness and silence, both are absent; this is the stillness that even sages cannot differentiate'? -- Explaining the second sentence above. Here, both internal and external are empty, just like wisdom and the object to be extinguished both disappear together, and even 'stillness' is not established. Assuming there is 'stillness and sameness' is to eliminate 'difference', and since 'difference' has been eliminated, it is submerged in the ocean of the fruit of 'sameness', only realizing correspondence, beyond thought and discussion. The meaning of the text can be understood. Therefore, the sutra says: 'The dharmas (諸法) are not different', is it said that 'continuing the duck's legs and cutting the crane's legs (續鳧截鶴) (metaphor for violating natural laws and forcing uniformity), leveling mountains and filling valleys (夷岳盈壑) (leveling high mountains and filling deep valleys)', and then there is no difference? It is truly because of 'not being different from difference', so although there are differences, there are actually no differences. -- The first sentence quotes the sutra. The 'Chapter on Universal Learning' of the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra (大品般若經) says: 'The dharmas (諸法) are without characteristics, not one characteristic, not different characteristics. If one cultivates without characteristics, one is cultivating prajna (般若)', etc.
此中略引一句也。豈曰下引事會釋。鳧雁屬脛短者。鶴脛長者。意云。諸法差別。如鳧短鶴長等。然性無不空。空故不異。不待續截夷盈然後平等。亦文借莊子。彼云鳧脛雖短續之則憂。鶴脛雖長斷之則悲。誠以下不以諸相為不異。但以性空平等故不異也。
故經云。甚奇世尊。于無異法中而說諸法異。又云。般若與諸法亦不一相。亦不異相信矣 大品六喻品云。世尊云何無異法中。而分別說異相。又云下大品照明遍學品云。諸法無相非一相非異相。合亦無所合。初段不分心境。即同而異。後段心境相對。非一非異。雙證前文。信受者。聖教為定量故量故亦見法無疑故。
難曰。論云。言用則異言寂則同 舉前文為疑起之因。
未詳。般若之內則有用寂之異乎 疑聖心唯一。如何復有寂照之二。二則非一。一則非二。故成相違。
答曰。用即寂。寂即用。用寂體一同出而異名。更無無用之寂而主于用也 初二句相即顯一。次二句釋成非異。正因相即所以非異。同出下語借老氏。亦非寂用復有同出之源。但論主巧用彼。又不可隨文取義。后二句謂即用之寂與用為體。豈有用外單寂而來主于用。邪主猶體也。亦合云又無無寂之用。以賓于寂。約體用重輕假分賓主。
是以智彌昧照逾明(實
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 這裡略微引用一句。難道說下面引用的事例可以解釋嗎？野鴨和大雁的腿是短的，鶴的腿是長的。意思是說，諸法的差別，就像野鴨的腿短、鶴的腿長等等。然而，自性沒有不空的。因為空，所以沒有差異。不必續長截短、削平填滿然後才平等。這也是借用了莊子的說法。莊子說，野鴨的腿雖然短，續接它就會感到憂愁；鶴的腿雖然長，截斷它就會感到悲傷。確實，以下不以諸相為沒有差異，只是因為自性空、平等，所以沒有差異。
所以經中說：『非常奇特，世尊（Śākyamuni，釋迦牟尼）在沒有差異的法中，卻說諸法有差異。』又說：『般若（Prajñā，智慧）與諸法也不一相，也不異相。』相信這些。《大品般若經》的六喻品中說：『世尊，為什麼在沒有差異的法中，卻分別解說差異之相？』又《大品般若經》的照明遍學品中說：『諸法無相，非一相，非異相，合起來也沒有什麼可合的。』前一段不分心境，就是同而異；后一段心境相對，就是非一非異。雙重證明前文。信受的人，以聖教為定量，因為是定量，所以也見法無疑。
提問：論中說：『從作用上說，就是差異；從寂靜上說，就是相同。』引用前文作為產生疑問的原因。
不清楚。在般若（Prajñā，智慧）之內，有作用和寂靜的差異嗎？懷疑聖人的心是唯一的，怎麼又會有寂照這兩種呢？有兩種就不是一，有一就不是二，所以形成矛盾。
回答：作用就是寂靜，寂靜就是作用。作用和寂靜本體相同，只是名稱不同。更沒有沒有作用的寂靜而主宰作用。』最初兩句相即，顯示為一；其次兩句解釋，說明不是差異。正因為相即，所以不是差異。『同出』這句話借用了老子的說法。也不是說寂靜和作用另外有共同產生的根源，只是論主巧妙地運用了它。又不可以按照字面意思來理解。後面兩句說，即作用的寂靜與作用為一體，哪裡有用之外單獨的寂靜來主宰作用呢？『主』就是『體』的意思。也可以說，又沒有沒有寂靜的作用，來作為寂靜的賓客。從體和用的輕重上，假立賓主。
因此，智慧越是隱昧，照用就越是明亮（實際上……）
【English Translation】 English version: Here, a sentence is briefly quoted. Does it mean that the examples cited below can explain it? Ducks and geese have short legs, while cranes have long legs. The intention is that the differences in all dharmas are like the short legs of ducks and the long legs of cranes, and so on. However, there is no nature that is not empty. Because of emptiness, there is no difference. There is no need to lengthen what is short, shorten what is long, level what is uneven, or fill what is empty to achieve equality. This also borrows from Zhuangzi's saying. Zhuangzi said, 'Although the legs of a duck are short, it would be distressing to lengthen them; although the legs of a crane are long, it would be sad to cut them off.' Indeed, the following does not consider the various characteristics as not being different, but only because the nature is empty and equal, therefore there is no difference.
Therefore, the sutra says, 'It is very wonderful that the World Honored One (Śākyamuni, 釋迦牟尼) speaks of the differences of all dharmas within the undifferentiated dharma.' It also says, 'Prajñā (般若, wisdom) and all dharmas are neither identical nor different.' Believe this. The 'Six Similes' chapter of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra says, 'World Honored One, why do you separately explain the characteristics of difference within the undifferentiated dharma?' Also, the 'Illumination and Universal Learning' chapter of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra says, 'All dharmas are without characteristics, neither identical nor different, and there is nothing to combine.' The first part does not distinguish between mind and environment, which is the same yet different; the latter part, with mind and environment in relation, is neither identical nor different. This doubly proves the previous text. Those who believe and accept take the holy teachings as a standard, and because it is a standard, they also see the Dharma without doubt.
Question: The treatise says, 'In terms of function, there is difference; in terms of stillness, there is sameness.' The previous text is cited as the cause of arising doubt.
It is unclear. Within Prajñā (般若, wisdom), are there differences between function and stillness? It is doubted that the mind of the sage is unique, so how can there be both stillness and illumination? If there are two, then it is not one; if there is one, then it is not two, thus forming a contradiction.
Answer: Function is stillness, and stillness is function. Function and stillness are the same in essence, but different in name. There is no stillness without function that dominates function.' The first two sentences are mutually inclusive, showing oneness; the next two sentences explain, showing non-difference. Precisely because they are mutually inclusive, they are not different. The phrase 'arising together' borrows from Laozi's saying. It is not that stillness and function have another common source of arising, but the author of the treatise skillfully uses it. Also, one should not take the meaning literally. The last two sentences say that the stillness that is function is one with function, so how can there be a separate stillness outside of function that dominates function? 'Dominates' means 'essence.' It can also be said that there is no function without stillness to be a guest to stillness. The host and guest are provisionally established based on the relative importance of essence and function.
Therefore, the more obscure the wisdom, the brighter the illumination (in reality...)
)神彌靜應逾動(權)豈曰明昧動靜之異哉 心用之外了無寂境故。此但屬般若。成立本論也。謂二智皆即寂而照。正照而寂。豈曰下會歸一致。前約寂用非二。答成一體。此約權實一心寂照雙含。實相般若該心境融真妄。總萬法括二乘。未有一法非實相也。
故成具云不為而過為(權)寶積曰無心無識無不覺知(實) 成具即經正文。
斯則窮神(權)盡智(實)極像外之談也即(就)之明文聖心可知矣 通結上文。謂窮二智之玄理。盡物外之清談也。明文者。謂前所引聖教。依教出理。般若之道可知悟也。然上九翻問答皆抉擇前宗。但初翻揀彼儒老不矜不恃遠非般若。中間七次或權實雙明。或二智殊辨。或境智合說。或同異料簡。至於第九。寂用同源歸般若之極致爾。
劉公致問 致至也說文曰。送詣也。諸說公名程之。字仲思。彭城人。漢楚元王之裔。外善百家內研佛理。與儒者雷次宗。宗炳周續之等。皆當代名流。事遠公于廬阜。稱十八賢。精結蓮社。時龍光寺生法師入關。就學于什公。因與論主莫逆。生公南返。乃以前論出示廬山社眾。遺民覽之。嘆曰。不意方袍復有平叔。因以興問。實曰起予。瑤和尚云。雖跡在遺民。亦遠公之深意。
遺民和南頃餐(味)徽(美)聞(去聲)
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：神妙的寂靜與靈動的應化超越了動與靜的區分，難道可以用明與昧來區分嗎？心體作用之外，沒有獨立的寂靜境界。因此，這些都屬於般若的範疇，是爲了成立本論而說的。意思是說，兩種智慧都是在寂靜中照見，在照見中寂靜。『豈曰下』一句是會歸到一致的境界。前面從寂靜和作用不是二的角度，回答了成為一體的問題。這裡從權智和實智一心，寂照雙重包含的角度來說明。實相般若涵蓋心境，融合真妄，總攝萬法，包括二乘，沒有一法不是實相。 所以《成具光明定意經》說：『不作為而超過了作為』（權智），《寶積經》說：『無心無識，無不覺知』（實智）。《成具光明定意經》就是經文的正文。 這便是窮盡神妙（權智），竭盡智慧（實智），達到超脫形象之外的談論。『即』的明文，聖人的心意是可以理解的。總結上文，意思是說窮盡兩種智慧的玄妙道理，竭盡物外的清凈談論。『明文』指的是前面所引用的聖教，依據教義闡發道理，般若的道理是可以理解和領悟的。然而，上面九次問答都是爲了抉擇之前的宗義，只是最初一次揀擇了儒家的不矜不恃，遠遠不是般若。中間七次，或者權智和實智雙重闡明，或者兩種智慧特別辨析，或者境智合在一起說，或者從同異的角度來考慮。到了第九次，寂靜和作用同源，歸於般若的極致。 劉公致問。『致』是到的意思，《說文》說：『送詣也』。諸位所說的劉公，名程之，字仲思，彭城人，是漢楚元王的後代。對外擅長百家之學，對內研究佛理。與儒者雷次宗、宗炳、周續之等人，都是當代名流。在廬山追隨慧遠大師，被稱為『十八賢』，精進結社唸佛。當時龍光寺的生法師入關，向鳩摩羅什學習，因此與論主關係密切。生公從關中返回南方，於是將以前的論著拿出來給廬山蓮社的眾人看。遺民看了之後，感嘆說：『沒想到出家之人中還有王弼這樣的人。』因此而興起疑問。『實曰起予』，瑤和尚說：『雖然形跡是遺民，也是慧遠大師的深意。』 遺民和南，頃刻之間品嚐到美味，讚美所聞（去聲）。
【English Translation】 English version: The wondrous stillness and the dynamic responsiveness transcend the distinction between movement and stillness. How can we differentiate them by brightness and obscurity? Outside the function of the mind-essence, there is no independent state of stillness. Therefore, these all belong to the category of Prajna (wisdom), and are spoken to establish this treatise. It means that both wisdoms illuminate in stillness and are still in illumination. The phrase 'How can we say below' converges to a state of unity. Previously, from the perspective that stillness and function are not two, it answered the question of becoming one entity. Here, it explains from the perspective of expedient wisdom and true wisdom being of one mind, with stillness and illumination doubly contained. The true aspect of Prajna encompasses mind and environment, integrates truth and delusion, encompasses all dharmas, including the Two Vehicles (Sravakas and Pratyekabuddhas), and there is not a single dharma that is not the true aspect. Therefore, the 'Chengju Guangming Dingyi Sutra' says: 'Acting without acting surpasses acting' (expedient wisdom), and the 'Ratnakuta Sutra' says: 'Without mind, without consciousness, there is nothing that is not known' (true wisdom). The 'Chengju Guangming Dingyi Sutra' is the exact text of the sutra. This is to exhaust the wondrous (expedient wisdom), to exhaust wisdom (true wisdom), and to reach discussions beyond form. The clear text of 'is' makes the sage's intention knowable. Summarizing the above, it means to exhaust the profound principles of the two wisdoms and to exhaust the pure discussions beyond things. 'Clear text' refers to the sacred teachings quoted earlier, elucidating the principles based on the teachings, and the path of Prajna can be understood and realized. However, the nine questions and answers above are all to resolve the previous doctrines, only the first time selecting the Confucian non-arrogance and non-reliance, far from Prajna. In the middle seven times, either expedient wisdom and true wisdom are both clarified, or the two wisdoms are particularly distinguished, or the environment and wisdom are spoken together, or considered from the perspective of similarities and differences. By the ninth time, stillness and function have the same source, returning to the ultimate of Prajna. Liu Gong (a person's name) sent a question. 'Zhi' means to arrive, 'Shuowen' says: 'To send and visit'. The Liu Gong you are talking about, named Cheng Zhi (a person's name), styled Zhongsi (a person's style name), from Pengcheng (a place name), is a descendant of the King of Chu Yuan of the Han Dynasty. Outwardly, he is good at the learning of the Hundred Schools, and inwardly, he studies Buddhist principles. With Confucian scholars Lei Cizong (a person's name), Zong Bing (a person's name), Zhou Xuzhi (a person's name) and others, they are all famous figures of the time. He followed Master Huiyuan (a person's name) at Mount Lu (a place name), and was known as one of the 'Eighteen Sages', diligently forming a society to recite the Buddha's name. At that time, Dharma Master Sheng (a person's name) of Longguang Temple (a place name) entered the pass and studied with Kumarajiva (a person's name), so he had a close relationship with the author of the treatise. When Master Sheng returned south from the pass, he took out the previous treatises and showed them to the people of the Lotus Society at Mount Lu. After reading it, the hermit exclaimed: 'I didn't expect that there would be someone like Wang Bi (a person's name) among the monks.' Therefore, questions arose. 'Shi Yue Qi Yu', Venerable Yao (a person's name) said: 'Although the traces are those of a hermit, it is also the deep meaning of Master Huiyuan.' The hermit bowed in respect, tasting the deliciousness in an instant, praising what was heard (fourth tone).
有懷遙佇(久立)歲末寒嚴體中(道)如何音(信)寄壅隔增用抱蘊。弟子沉痾(病身)草澤(藪澤)常有弊瘵(病)耳。因慧明道人北遊。裁(才司)通其情 遺者。逸也。謂野逸散民。比跡虞仲夷逸。亦自號也。公亦嘗為柴桑令。值桓玄僭逆初萌。乃嘆曰。晉室無磐石之固。蒼生有累卵之危因去廬山辟命弗顧。太尉劉裕見其野志沖邈。乃以高尚人相禮(云云)和南者。天竺敬禮之辭。頃餐下名達曰聞。謂近味美名遠懷思慕。久立遠望也。本傳佇作仰字。蘊者。積蓄不通也。時南北兩國故音信難通。增其蘊積耳。沉痾下。謂陸沉病身於山林草澤之中。更嘗有弊困之病也。
古人不以形疏致(意)淡。悟涉則親。是以雖復江山悠邈不面當(昔)年。至於企懷風味鏡(鑒)心像跡。佇悅之勤良以深矣。緬(遠)然無因瞻霞永嘆。順時愛敬。冀(希)因行李數(頻)有承聞 引古量今妙契一貫。豈以地殊而隔。悟同則親。是以(云云)企懷謂劉公企仰而懷思也。風味謂肇公德風道味。像跡即上風味影像軌跡也。鏡心謂鑑於劉公之因此。佇立而悅慕勤勤不忘。無因者。無由一見也。但遠望秦中煙霞長嘆爾。行李遊人也。聞謂音問。當遇行人令我頻承師之音問。
伏願彼大眾康(安)和。外國法師常休(慶)納
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：弟子有懷遙寄，長久站立於歲末寒冷之時，身體道體如何？音信被阻隔，更加增添了心中的抱歉和思念。弟子我身患沉疴（長久的疾病），隱居在草澤（偏遠之地），常常感到身體弊瘵（困頓虛弱）。恰逢慧明道人將要北遊，希望能稍微（或者說，藉由慧明道人）傳遞我的心意。『遺者』，是『逸』的意思，指的是隱逸的百姓。可以比作虞仲夷逸（都是隱士）。（慧遠）也自號『遺民』。您（指劉遺民）也曾經擔任柴桑縣令，正值桓玄（人名）僭越叛逆的苗頭剛出現時，您就嘆息說：『晉朝的統治沒有磐石般的穩固，百姓面臨著像堆疊的雞蛋一樣的危險。』於是離開了廬山，拒絕朝廷的任命。太尉劉裕（人名）認為您的志向高潔，所以用對待高尚之人的禮節來對待您（此處省略一些內容）。『和南』是天竺（古印度）表達敬意的辭語。『頃餐下名達曰聞』，意思是說，（您的）美名即使是短暫地聽到，也足以讓人心生嚮往和思慕，長久地站立遠望。本傳中『佇』字寫作『仰』字。『蘊』是積蓄不通的意思。當時南北兩國，所以音信難以溝通，更加增添了心中的積蓄和思念。『沉疴下』，是說我陸沉于山林草澤之中，身體抱恙，還常常感到弊困之病。 古人不因為外在的疏遠而導致情意淡薄，如果彼此在佛法上的領悟相近，就會感到親近。因此，即使相隔遙遠的江山，不能夠面對面相見，但是對於（鳩摩）羅什（Kumārajīva）法師的德風道味，仍然心懷企慕，（他的）音容笑貌也常常浮現在腦海中。長久地佇立，心生喜悅和勤勉，實在是情意深厚啊！遙遠而沒有機會瞻仰（您的風采），只能對著（秦地的）煙霞長久地嘆息。順應時節，表達愛敬之情，希望能夠通過來往的行人，經常聽到您的音訊。引用古人的事例來衡量現在的情況，（發現）其中的道理精妙地契合，始終如一。怎麼會因為地域的阻隔而疏遠呢？如果彼此在佛法上的領悟相同，就會感到親近。因此（以下省略一些內容）。『企懷』是說劉公（劉遺民）企仰而懷思（鳩摩羅什）。『風味』是指鳩摩羅什的德風道味。『像跡』就是指上面的風味影像軌跡。『鏡心』是指鑑於劉公的因此。佇立而喜悅慕勤勤不忘。（我）沒有機會能夠一見（您），只能遠望秦中的煙霞而長嘆。『行李』是指來往的遊人。『聞』是指音問。希望遇到行人，能夠讓我經常聽到師父您的音訊。 希望彼方的大眾康寧安和，希望外國的法師們常常能夠吉祥安樂。
【English Translation】 English version: With longing in my heart, I stand for a long time in the cold of the year's end. How is your body and your practice? The obstruction of communication only increases my regret and longing. I, your disciple, suffer from a chronic illness (a long-term ailment), living in seclusion in the wilderness (remote areas), and often feel physically weak and exhausted. It happens that the Daoist Huiming is about to travel north, and I hope to convey my feelings through him (or rather, by means of Daoist Huiming). 'Yi Zhe' means 'Yi,' referring to reclusive people. It can be compared to Yu Zhong Yi Yi (both were hermits). (Huiyuan) also called himself 'Yi Min' (a remnant of a fallen dynasty). You (referring to Liu Yimin) once served as the magistrate of Chaisang County. Just as the signs of Huan Xuan's (a person's name) usurpation were beginning to emerge, you sighed and said, 'The rule of the Jin Dynasty is not as solid as a rock, and the people face dangers like stacked eggs.' So you left Lushan and refused the court's appointment. Grand Commandant Liu Yu (a person's name) considered your aspirations to be noble, so he treated you with the respect due to a virtuous person (some content omitted here). 'Henan' is a term of respect from Tianzhu (ancient India). 'Qing can xia ming da yue wen' means that even a brief hearing of (your) good name is enough to inspire longing and admiration, causing one to stand and gaze into the distance for a long time. In the original biography, the character 'zhu' (stand for a long time) is written as 'yang' (look up to). 'Yun' means accumulated and blocked. At that time, the North and South were divided, so communication was difficult, further increasing the accumulation of thoughts and longing in my heart. 'Chen ke xia' means that I am submerged in the mountains and forests, suffering from illness, and often feel weak and exhausted. The ancients did not let external distance lead to indifference in feelings. If there is a close understanding of the Dharma, one feels close. Therefore, even though separated by distant lands and unable to meet face to face, I still cherish the virtuous conduct and profound teachings of Master Kumārajīva (his name), and his image often appears in my mind. Standing for a long time, feeling joy and diligence, is truly a profound expression of affection! Far away and without the opportunity to see (your grace), I can only sigh for a long time at the clouds and mists (of the Qin region). Following the seasons, expressing love and respect, I hope to hear from you frequently through passing travelers. Quoting examples from the past to measure the present situation, (I find that) the principles are wonderfully consistent. How could we be estranged by geographical separation? If there is a shared understanding of the Dharma, one feels close. Therefore (some content omitted below). 'Qi huai' means that Duke Liu (Liu Yimin) looks up to and cherishes (Kumārajīva). 'Feng wei' refers to Kumārajīva's virtuous conduct and profound teachings. 'Xiang ji' refers to the image and traces of the aforementioned virtuous conduct. 'Jing xin' refers to reflecting on Duke Liu's example. Standing and rejoicing, cherishing and never forgetting. (I) have no opportunity to meet (you), and can only gaze at the clouds and mists of the Qin region and sigh. 'Xing li' refers to passing travelers. 'Wen' refers to news. I hope to meet travelers who can bring me news from my teacher. I hope that the great assembly there is peaceful and harmonious, and that the foreign Dharma masters are always blessed with auspiciousness and joy.
祝也。外國法師什公也。
上人以悟發之器而遘(遇)茲淵(深)對。想開究之功足以盡過半之思故以每惟乖(差)闊(遠)憤愧何深 悟發者。謂遇什公明悟開發也。淵對指什公。開究下謂開解窮究般若之道。想足盡了過半之思。意云。已盡過半語用繫辭。謂悟極聖心也。故每下劉公每思南北乖違疏闊。不親一見。憤愧深也。
此山僧清常道戒彌勵(勉)禪隱之餘。則唯研唯講恂恂(敬貌)穆穆(和)故可樂矣 一所棲同處。二居戒甚勉。三禪定隱跡。四禪外講學。五相敬相和略張四行。六和備矣。
弟子既已遂宿心。而睹茲上軌。感寄之誠日月銘至 謂已果昔日棄世之念。又遇法社上妙軌範。感心奇托之誠。皎然不欺。唯指日月可以銘記之。至到也。亦擬春秋諸侯盟誓之辭。中吳源公云。誠心銘刻明如日月。瑤本至作志。甚通。
遠法師頃恒履宜。思(去聲)業精詣(至)幹幹宵夕。自非道用潛流。理為神遇(會)孰能以過順之年。湛氣茲之勤。所以憑慰既深。仰謝逾(益)絕 履宜者。謂履棧道候相宜順也。思業謂禪思行業乾健也。易初卦云。終日乾乾。是以建德匪懈。曉夜勤勤。予近稟 灌頂上師著思吉剜卜元言法。救行道精健兢兢宵夕。學廣德高。叔世一人也。自非正嘆。謂遠公
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 這是祝（一個名字）。外國法師什公（鳩摩羅什的尊稱）啊。
上人（指收信人）以開悟的資質而遇到如此精深的對話。想來您開解研究的功力足以了悟過半的佛法精髓，所以常常因為南北兩地相隔遙遠而感到憤慨和慚愧，這是多麼深刻啊！悟發，是指遇到什公后，（您的）明悟得到開發。淵對，指什公。開究下文是指開解窮究般若之道。想足盡了過半之思，意思是說，已經領悟了過半的佛法精髓，這裡借用了《繫辭》中的說法，是說領悟了極深的聖人之心。故每下文，劉公常常思念南北兩地乖違疏闊，不能親自一見，（為此）憤慨慚愧之情很深。
此山僧清心寡慾，常常勉勵自己遵守戒律，除了禪修隱居之外，就只是研究和講解佛法，態度恭敬和藹，所以（生活）是快樂的。一、所居住的地方相同。二、持戒非常勉勵。三、禪定隱居。四、禪修之外還講學。五、互相尊敬和睦。大致闡述了四種修行。六、和睦完備。
弟子我已經實現了宿願，並且看到了您這樣的上乘規範，感激寄託之情，如同日月般銘記在心。這是說已經實現了昔日棄絕塵世的念頭，又遇到了佛法社團中上妙的規範，感恩於心，真誠不欺，只有日月可以銘記我的心意。至，是到達的意思。也像是春秋時期諸侯盟誓的辭令。中吳源公說，誠心銘刻，明如日月。瑤本中『至』寫作『志』，也很通順。
遠法師（慧遠）近來一直遵循適宜的道路，精進禪思行業，日夜勤勉。如果不是因為道的力量在暗中流動，真理的相遇，誰能夠以超過順應天命的年齡，保持如此精湛的氣息和勤奮呢？所以憑藉著（您的來信）慰藉之情非常深厚，仰慕感謝之情更加無以言表。履宜，是指履行踐行與道相宜的道路。思業，是指禪思行業。乾乾，是剛健的意思。《易經》初卦說，終日乾乾，所以要建立德行，不懈怠，曉夜勤勤。我最近稟告灌頂上師，寫了思吉剜卜元言法，救行道精健兢兢宵夕，學識廣博，德行高尚，是末世中的一人啊。自非正嘆，是讚歎遠公。
【English Translation】 English version: This is Zhu (a name). The foreign Dharma master Shi Gong (venerable title for Kumarajiva).
The Superior One (referring to the recipient of the letter) encountered such profound dialogues with his enlightened qualities. I imagine that your ability to unravel and research is sufficient to comprehend more than half of the essence of the Buddha-dharma, so you often feel indignant and ashamed because of the distance between the North and South, how profound this is! 'Wu Fa' means that after encountering Shi Gong, your enlightenment was developed. 'Yuan Dui' refers to Shi Gong. 'Kai Jiu' below refers to unraveling and thoroughly researching the Prajna path. 'Xiang Zu Jin Liao Guo Ban Zhi Si' means that you have already understood more than half of the essence of the Buddha-dharma, borrowing from the words in the 'Appended Remarks' of the Book of Changes, saying that you have understood the extremely deep heart of the sage. 'Gu Mei' below, Duke Liu often thinks of the separation and distance between the North and South, unable to meet in person, and feels very indignant and ashamed because of this.
This mountain monk is pure and desireless, and often encourages himself to abide by the precepts. Besides practicing Chan meditation and living in seclusion, he only studies and lectures on the Dharma, with a respectful and amiable attitude, so (life) is joyful. 1. The places where we live are the same. 2. Upholding the precepts is very diligent. 3. Chan meditation and living in seclusion. 4. Lecturing on the Dharma in addition to Chan meditation. 5. Respecting and being harmonious with each other. Roughly elaborating on the four practices. 6. Harmony is complete.
I, your disciple, have already fulfilled my long-cherished wish, and have seen such a superior standard from you. The sincerity of my gratitude is engraved in my heart like the sun and moon. This means that I have already realized my past intention to abandon the world, and have encountered the supreme standards in the Dharma community. I am grateful in my heart, sincere and not deceiving, only the sun and moon can record my intentions. 'Zhi' means to arrive. It is also like the rhetoric of the covenants of the feudal lords during the Spring and Autumn period. Zhong Wu Yuan Gong said, 'Sincere inscription, as bright as the sun and moon.' In the Yao version, 'Zhi' is written as 'Zhi', which is also understandable.
Dharma Master Yuan (Huiyuan) has recently been following the appropriate path, diligently practicing Chan meditation, day and night. If it were not for the power of the Dao flowing in secret, the encounter with truth, who could maintain such exquisite breath and diligence at an age beyond obeying destiny? Therefore, relying on (your letter), the feeling of comfort is very deep, and the admiration and gratitude are even more beyond words. 'Lu Yi' means to fulfill and practice the path that is appropriate to the Dao. 'Si Ye' refers to Chan meditation practice. 'Qian Qian' means strong and healthy. The first hexagram of the Book of Changes says, 'Qian Qian all day long,' so one must establish virtue and not be lazy, diligently day and night. I recently reported to the Guru of Empowerment, and wrote the 'Siji Wanbu Yuan Yan Fa', saving the practice of the Dao, being diligent and conscientious day and night, with broad knowledge and high virtue, he is one in the degenerate age. 'Zi Fei Zheng Tan' is praising Yuan Gong.
如斯干干。蓋神智證理。即道之用潛注流行。故能爾爾。過順者。孔子自謂六十而耳順。今謂遠公六旬已上人也。所以下劉復自敘。意云。謂遠德高廣所以託身慰心亦深。恩大難答。致令仰德報謝。其路尤絕。
去年夏末。始見生上人示無知論。才運清俊旨(趣)中沈允(深當)推涉聖文。婉(美)而有歸。披味慇勤不能釋手。真可謂浴心方等之淵。而悟懷絕冥之肆者也 謂論主澡浴心智于方廣海中。絕冥者。至深也。肆者。如市肆之肆。謂悟徹深性處。
若令此辨(論)遂通。則般若眾流殆(將)不言而會。可不忻乎。可不忻乎 理非廣略學貴樞機。樞機入手。眾流普會。豈可不悅。悅之又悅。故再言也。眾流指八部般若。
然夫理微者辭險。唱獨者應稀。茍非絕言象之表者。將以存象而致乖乎。意謂。答以緣求智之章婉轉窮盡。極為精巧。無所間然矣 初句雙嘆辭理。謂所詮般若微妙。令能詮論辭嚴峻。次句嘆論主。獨唱如雪曲唱孤令和者亦鮮。茍非下反推也。唯忘言者會。指存象者乖趣。意謂下舉論以艱。婉轉猶展轉也。間然者。同論語禹吾無間然矣。彼釋間謂間廁。蓋其理完密無有間隙可廁入也。
但暗者難以頓曉。猶有餘疑一兩(二也)今輒題之。如別想從容之暇(閑)復能粗(
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：像這樣持續不斷地努力。大概是神智已經證悟了真理。這就是道的運用潛移默化地執行，所以才能達到這樣的境界。至於『過順者』，孔子曾說自己六十歲時能做到『耳順』，這裡是指遠公（慧遠大師）是六十歲以上的人了。所以下面的劉遺民（劉復）自己敘述說，意思是說，認為遠公的德行高尚而廣博，所以能將身心寄託於他，得到深深的慰藉。恩情深重難以報答，以至於仰慕他的德行，想要報答感謝，但道路卻更加遙遠。 去年夏末，我才見到生上人（僧肇）所著的《無知論》。他的文采清新俊逸，主旨深刻允當，推究聖人的文章，委婉而有歸宿。我反覆閱讀，愛不釋手。真可以說是用心沐浴在方等（般若）經典的深淵中，而領悟到超越冥昧的境界。《無知論》的作者用心智洗滌于廣闊的般若經典之中。『絕冥者』，指達到至深的境界。『肆者』，如同市肆的『肆』，指完全領悟深層自性的地方。 如果這部論著能夠順利流通，那麼般若的眾多流派大概會不言而喻地匯聚在一起，這難道不值得高興嗎？這難道不值得高興嗎？』真理並非在于廣泛和簡略，學習的關鍵在於抓住樞機。一旦掌握了樞機，各種流派自然會普遍匯聚。難道能不高興嗎？高興之餘再次表達高興，所以重複說了。『眾流』指的是八部般若。 然而，道理精微，言辭就顯得艱深；獨自倡導，響應的人就很少。如果不是超越了言語和形象的表面，那麼將以執著于形象而導致偏差嗎？』意思是說，用闡述緣起和求智的篇章，委婉詳盡地論述，極其精巧，無懈可擊。第一句同時感嘆辭藻和道理。認為所詮釋的般若微妙，使得能詮釋的論辭嚴謹深刻。第二句感嘆論主，獨自唱高調，如同雪夜唱歌，唱和的人很少。『茍非』以下是反向推論。只有忘卻言語的人才能領會，執著于形象的人會偏離方向。意思是說，下面舉出論著的艱深，『婉轉』如同『展轉』。『間然者』，如同《論語》中『禹吾無間然矣』。那裡解釋『間』為『間隙』。大概是說他的道理完整嚴密，沒有間隙可以插入。
【English Translation】 English version: Thus, strive continuously. It is probably because the divine wisdom has realized the truth. This is the subtle and pervasive operation of the Dao, enabling such attainment. As for 'Guo Shun' (exceeding obedience), Confucius said that at sixty, he could 'listen with a docile ear.' Here, it refers to Master Yuan (Huiyuan) being over sixty years old. Therefore, Liu Yimin (Liu Fu) narrates below, meaning that he considers Master Yuan's virtue to be noble and vast, allowing him to entrust his body and mind to him, receiving deep comfort. The kindness is profound and difficult to repay, leading him to admire his virtue and desire to express gratitude, but the path becomes even more distant. At the end of last summer, I first saw the 'Treatise on Non-Knowing' by Venerable Sheng (Sengzhao). His writing style is fresh and elegant, the main points are profound and appropriate, exploring the writings of the sages, gentle and with a destination. I read it repeatedly, unable to put it down. It can truly be said that he bathed his mind in the abyss of the Vaipulya (Prajna) scriptures and realized the realm beyond darkness. The author of 'Treatise on Non-Knowing' washes his mind and wisdom in the vast ocean of Prajna scriptures. 'Beyond darkness' refers to reaching the deepest realm. 'Si' is like the 'Si' in marketplace, referring to the place where one fully understands the deep nature. If this treatise can be smoothly circulated, then the many schools of Prajna will probably converge without saying a word. Isn't this worth rejoicing? Isn't this worth rejoicing?' The truth is not in breadth or brevity, the key to learning is to grasp the pivot. Once the pivot is grasped, all schools will naturally converge universally. How can one not be happy? Expressing happiness again after happiness, hence the repetition. 'Many schools' refers to the eight divisions of Prajna. However, profound principles lead to difficult language; solitary advocacy leads to few responses. If it is not beyond the surface of words and images, then will clinging to images lead to deviation?' The meaning is that the chapters explaining dependent origination and seeking wisdom are elaborated in a gentle and detailed manner, extremely ingenious and flawless. The first sentence simultaneously laments the language and the principle. It considers the Prajna being interpreted to be subtle, making the interpreting treatise rigorous and profound. The second sentence laments the author, singing a high note alone, like singing in a snowy night, with few respondents. 'If not' below is a reverse inference. Only those who forget words can understand, those who cling to images will deviate. The meaning is that the difficulty of the treatise is mentioned below, 'gently' is like 'repeatedly'. 'Interruption' is like 'Yu, I have no interruption' in the Analects. There, 'interruption' is explained as 'gap'. It probably means that his reasoning is complete and tight, with no gaps to insert.
略)為釋之 從容舉動也。如別者。謂問在書外。今合之也。
論序云。般若之體非有非無。虛不失照。照不失虛。故曰。不動等覺而建立諸法。下章云。異乎人者神明故。不可以事相求之耳。又云。用即寂。寂即用。神彌靜應逾動 序者。指問答已前論文。下章下兩段舉問答中第一第九。
夫聖心冥寂理極同無(實)不疾而疾不徐(遲)而徐(權) 徐疾文借莊子。彼云。徐則甘而不固。疾則苦而不入。
是以知不廢寂。寂不廢知。未始不寂未始不知。故其運物成功。化世之道雖處有名之中。而遠與無名同 初四句通敘前文寂用一致。故其下承前敘神彌靜等二句。謂權智運物建化世之功。時雖居有名之中。以有名之世性空。即是實智印無名之理。二智無殊也。有名無名文出老氏。彼云無名天地之始。有名萬物之母。
斯理之玄固(實)常所迷昧者矣 謂至理玄妙我實迷昧而未入也。上乃就許下方致問。
但今談者所疑。于高論之旨。欲求(索)聖心之異 遺民欲難托于眾情。故云但今等。疑寂用非二之旨。以求權實兩殊。
為謂(說)窮虛(真諦)極數(俗諦)妙盡冥符(合)邪。謂將心體自然。虛怕獨感(存)邪 餘本虛作靈字。瑤作虛字。今從之。問意云。論稱寂用相即
。為一者。謂般若之用證窮真諦之虛。斷盡俗諦之數。妙盡冥符為一邪。此難實智冥真為一。謂將下自然者。謂般若之用不在窮虛極數。當體虛怕。無相獨存為一邪。此難疑無權智。言獨者。不應群機。故二邪字疑而審之之辭。下雙關。
若窮虛極數妙盡冥符(過)則寂照之名。故是定慧之體耳。若心體自然虛怕獨感(過)則群數之應固(實)以幾(近)乎息矣 若實智冥符為一。何故前云寂照之二。以寂即是定。照即是慧。故依此求心。心應兩異。又若智體虛怕獨存為一應不會於群數之機。既獨存不應。何故前云應逾動。若許應動自合實外別有一權智。以冥本寂時更不能應。故若如是者二心宛殊。幾息等言文借周易。彼云。乾坤或幾乎息矣。
夫心數既玄而孤運其照。神淳(恬)化(物)表。而慧明獨存 文總四句。亦承前潛難無知也。初二句難實。意云。心與事數既妙盡玄寂可許無知。不合云孤運其照。存照則有知矣。后二句難權。意云。神既淳靜於物外。應不對機。唯慧明獨存。可許無知。若許應會豈非知乎。此文尤隱詳下答辭方可圓解。
當有深證。可試為辯之 深證有二義。一論主證解。二深經證據。
疑者當以撫會應機睹(觀)變(動)之知。不可謂之不有矣。而論旨云。本無
惑取之知。而未釋(通)所以不取之理 此難權智有取。意謂實智妙盡冥符不取可爾。權撫物機應大應小。觀物變動。此知定有。已上按定。而論旨下舉論以難。理合有取。論反謂無。未通不取之理也。
謂宜先定聖心。所以應會之道。為當唯照無相邪。為當咸睹其變邪。若睹其變則異乎無相。若唯照無相則無會可撫先可依二諦之境楷定聖心。若言心一者。假令權智應動觀物之時。為唯照物空無相邪。為照俗動有相邪。若睹下出違若觀相撫會。定失無相。若唯見無相卻失撫會也。聖心唯一定應得一失一。若令二諦俱得。理合權實兩殊。
既無會可撫。而有撫會之功。意有未悟幸復誨之 初句承前後句明違。設許無會聖心是一。複次違論如前云。功高二儀無不為等。后二句違而請通也。
論云。無當則物無不當。無是則物無不是。物無不是。故是而無是。物無不當。故當而無當 敘前正論以發疑端。下正難之。
夫無當而物無不當。乃所以為至當。無是而物無不是。乃所以為真是 既云無不當。宜其至當也。真是例之。
豈有真是而非是。至當而非當。而云當而無當。是而無是邪 是當之義已如前說。但劉公舉前文。已是已當。后復云當而無當等。不知復拂是當之跡文。如矛盾。義符膠
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 被迷惑而獲取的知識。卻沒有解釋(通曉)為什麼不獲取的道理。這是質疑權智有所獲取。意思是說實智精妙到了極點，暗合于道，不取是可以的。但權智撫慰萬物之機，應大應小，觀察萬物變動，這種認知必定是存在的。以上是按照已定的觀點，但論旨下面卻舉出論點來反駁，按道理應該有所取。但論點反而說沒有，這是沒有理解不取的道理。
應該先確定聖人的心，用來適應和領會事物的方法，是應當只照見無相呢？還是應當全部看到事物的變化呢？如果看到事物的變化，那就不同於無相。如果只照見無相，那就沒有適應和撫慰的方法。應該先依據二諦的境界來確定聖人的心。如果說心是一樣的，假設權智適應變動觀察事物的時候，是隻照見事物的空無相呢？還是照見世俗的變動有相呢？如果看到（有相），下面就出現違背，如果觀察（有）相併加以撫慰，必定失去無相。如果只見到無相，卻又失去了撫慰。聖人的心如果只有一種確定的狀態，就會得到一樣失去一樣。如果能使二諦都得到，按道理權智和實智應該有所不同。
既然沒有適應和撫慰的方法，卻有撫慰的功能，意思是（我）還有沒領悟的地方，希望再次教誨。第一句承接前後的句子，說明（觀點）是相違背的。假設允許沒有適應，聖人的心是一樣的。再次違背論點，如前面所說，功勞高過天地，沒有不作為的等等。後面兩句是（因為）不理解而請求開導。
論中說：沒有適合的，那麼事物就沒有不適合的。沒有是的，那麼事物就沒有不是的。事物沒有不是的，所以是而無是。事物沒有不適合的，所以適合而無適合。敘述前面的正論，用來引發疑問的開端。下面正式反駁它。
沒有適合的，而事物沒有不適合的，這才是最適合的。沒有是的，而事物沒有不是的，這才是最真實的。既然說沒有不適合的，就應該是最適合的。最真實的情況也是這樣。
難道有最真實的卻不是是，最適合的卻不是適合，卻說適合而無適合，是而無是嗎？是和適合的含義已經像前面所說的那樣。但劉公舉出前面的文章，已經是是、是適合的，後面又說適合而無適合等等，不知道又抹去是和適合的痕跡，文章就像矛盾一樣，意義不相符。
【English Translation】 English version: Knowledge acquired through delusion. Yet, there is no explanation (understanding) of the reason for not acquiring it. This questions the acquisition of expedient wisdom (upaya-jnana). It means that ultimate wisdom (paramartha-jnana) is so subtle that it implicitly aligns with the Tao, and non-acquisition is acceptable. However, expedient wisdom soothes the mechanisms of all things, responding to the large and the small, observing the changes of all things; this kind of cognition must exist. The above is based on a fixed viewpoint, but the argument below raises points to refute it; in principle, there should be something acquired. But the argument instead says there is nothing, which is not understanding the reason for non-acquisition.
One should first determine the mind of the sage, the method used to adapt to and understand things. Should it only illuminate the absence of form (nirakara)? Or should it see all the changes of things? If it sees the changes of things, then it is different from the absence of form. If it only illuminates the absence of form, then there is no method of adapting and soothing. One should first determine the mind of the sage based on the realm of the two truths (dve satye). If it is said that the mind is the same, suppose when expedient wisdom adapts to changes and observes things, does it only illuminate the emptiness and absence of form of things? Or does it illuminate the mundane changes with form? If one sees (form), then a contradiction arises below; if one observes (form) and soothes it, one will surely lose the absence of form. If one only sees the absence of form, one loses the soothing. If the sage's mind has only one fixed state, it will gain one and lose one. If both truths can be obtained, in principle, expedient wisdom and ultimate wisdom should be different.
Since there is no method of adapting and soothing, yet there is the function of soothing, it means (I) still have something I have not understood, and I hope to be taught again. The first sentence connects the preceding and following sentences, explaining that (the viewpoints) are contradictory. Suppose it is allowed that there is no adaptation, and the sage's mind is the same. Again, contradicting the argument, as mentioned earlier, the merit is higher than heaven and earth, and there is nothing that is not done, etc. The latter two sentences are (because of) not understanding and requesting guidance.
The argument says: If there is nothing suitable, then there is nothing that is not suitable for things. If there is no 'is', then there is nothing that is not 'is' for things. Because things have no 'not is', therefore it 'is' and yet 'is not'. Because things have no 'not suitable', therefore it is 'suitable' and yet 'not suitable'. Narrating the preceding correct argument to raise the beginning of doubts. Below, formally refuting it.
If there is nothing suitable, and yet there is nothing that is not suitable for things, this is the most suitable. If there is no 'is', and yet there is nothing that is not 'is' for things, this is the most real. Since it is said that there is nothing that is not suitable, it should be the most suitable. The most real situation is also like this.
Could it be that the most real is not 'is', and the most suitable is not 'suitable', but it is said that it is 'suitable' and yet 'not suitable', 'is' and yet 'not is'? The meaning of 'is' and 'suitable' has already been explained as before. But Liu Gong raised the previous text, which is already 'is', is 'suitable', and later said 'suitable' and yet 'not suitable', etc., not knowing that he erased the traces of 'is' and 'suitable' again. The text is like a contradiction, and the meaning does not match.
漆。依名定理有是問也。
若謂至當非常當。真是非常是。此蓋悟惑之言本異耳。固(實)論旨所以不明也 恐救云。我言無當無是。非是泛常是當。故云當而無當等。劉復云。若謂爾者。此蓋悟者謂至當真是。迷者謂常當常是。本自異爾。何須說云當而無當等邪。依此訓無者非也。固論下直非論意。恐滯於是當。故拂之。劉公卻取為至當真是。心有所住非般若也。見下答辭 愿復重喻(曉)以祛(除)其惑矣 惑不從師。而解其于惑也。終不免矣。
論至日。即與遠法師詳省之。法師亦好相領得意。但標位似各有本。或當不必理盡同矣 好相領者。深許可也。本傳云。遠嘆未嘗有也。得意者。蓋得作者之意也。標位下謂標指般若。宗位師承各有源本。其理不必盡同。良以一心之上恒沙義相。專門受業非全同也。瑤和尚云。遠宗法性什宗實相。但眼目殊號爾。
頃兼以班(布)諸有懷。屢(數)有擊其節者。而恨不得與斯人同時也 不唯與遠公詳省。又示諸懷道者。亦數有和而許者。廬山名士高人如慧持慧永輩。非少而和者固非聊爾。節者樂之音節。若今之擊板以節樂也。
論主書答 書復前書。答釋前問。
不面在昔佇想用勞。慧明道人至。得去年十二月疏並問。披尋返覆欣(喜)
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：漆。依據名定理提出了這樣的問題。
如果說『至當』不是尋常的『當』，『真』不是尋常的『是』，這大概是開悟者和迷惑者理解不同罷了。因此，討論的主旨才不明確。恐怕有人會辯解說：『我說的是無當無是，不是指一般的當和是，所以說是當而無當等等。』劉認為，如果按你這樣說，這大概是開悟的人認為至當才是真，迷惑的人認為常當才是常是，本來就不同，何必說什麼是當而無當等等呢？按照這種解釋，『無』就錯了。因此，下面的討論並非討論的本意，恐怕會停留在『是當』上，所以否定了它。劉公卻認為這是至當才是真，心中有所執著就不是般若了。參見下面的答覆。希望再次用比喻來消除他們的迷惑。迷惑不向老師請教，卻自己解釋迷惑，最終無法避免迷惑。
討論到這裡，就和遠法師詳細地審查。法師也很贊同，領會了其中的意思。只是標示的地位好像各有依據，或許是『當』不必在理上完全相同。『好相領者』，是深深地認可的意思。《本傳》中說，遠法師感嘆從未有過這樣的理解。『得意者』，大概是領會了作者的意圖。『標位下』是指標示般若的宗位師承各有源本，其理不必完全相同。因為一心之上恒有沙數般的義相，專門從事研究的人也不可能完全相同。瑤和尚說：『遠法師宗法性，什法師宗實相，只是眼目的名稱不同罷了。』
近來也把這些觀點傳達給有相同想法的人，多次有人擊節讚賞，只是遺憾不能和這些人同時代。不只是和遠公詳細審查，也展示給修道的人，也有很多人贊同。廬山的名士高人如慧持、慧永等人，不少人都贊同，當然不是隨便說說而已。『節』是音樂的節奏，就像現在敲擊板來控制音樂節奏一樣。
論主的書信答覆，這封信回覆了之前的信，解答了之前的問題。
因為不能見面，過去一直思念，費心了。慧明道人到了，帶來了去年十二月的信和問題。打開反覆閱讀，非常高興。
【English Translation】 English version: Qi. Based on the theorem of names, this question is posed.
If it is said that 'ultimate appropriateness' (至當, zhì dāng) is not ordinary 'appropriateness' (當, dāng), and 'truth' (真, zhēn) is not ordinary 'is' (是, shì), this is probably because the enlightened and the deluded have different understandings. Therefore, the main point of the discussion is unclear. It is feared that someone will argue: 'What I mean is neither appropriate nor is (無當無是, wú dāng wú shì), not referring to ordinary appropriateness and is, so it is said to be appropriate but not appropriate, etc.' Liu believes that if you say so, it is probably that the enlightened think that ultimate appropriateness is truth, and the deluded think that ordinary appropriateness is ordinary is, which are inherently different. Why say what is appropriate but not appropriate, etc.? According to this interpretation, 'nothingness' (無, wú) is wrong. Therefore, the following discussion is not the original intention of the discussion, and it is feared that it will remain on 'is appropriate' (是當, shì dāng), so it is denied. Liu Gong, however, believes that this is ultimate appropriateness is truth, and if there is attachment in the heart, it is not Prajna. See the reply below. I hope to use metaphors again to eliminate their confusion. Confusion without consulting a teacher, but explaining the confusion by oneself, will ultimately not avoid confusion.
When the discussion reached this point, it was carefully reviewed with Dharma Master Yuan. The Dharma Master also agreed and understood the meaning. It's just that the indicated positions seem to have their own basis, perhaps 'appropriateness' does not necessarily have to be completely the same in principle. 'Good mutual understanding' (好相領者, hǎo xiāng lǐng zhě) means deep recognition. The original biography says that Dharma Master Yuan sighed that he had never had such an understanding. 'Understanding the meaning' (得意者, dé yì zhě) probably means understanding the author's intention. 'Indicating the position below' refers to indicating that the lineage of Prajna has its own origin, and the principles do not necessarily have to be completely the same. Because there are countless meanings above one mind, and those who specialize in research cannot be completely the same. Monk Yao said: 'Dharma Master Yuan follows the Dharma-nature, and Dharma Master Shi follows the reality-aspect, only the names of the eyes are different.'
Recently, these views have also been conveyed to those who have the same ideas, and many people have applauded and praised them, but it is a pity that they cannot be in the same era as these people. Not only was it carefully reviewed with Duke Yuan, but it was also shown to those who practice the Tao, and many people agreed. Famous scholars and high-ranking people in Lushan, such as Hui Chi and Hui Yong, many of them agreed, and of course it was not just casual talk. 'Jie' (節) is the rhythm of music, just like tapping the board to control the rhythm of music now.
The reply to the letter from the discussant, this letter replies to the previous letter and answers the previous questions.
Because we cannot meet, I have been thinking about it in the past, and it has been hard work. Taoist Huiming arrived and brought the letter and questions from December of last year. Opening it and reading it repeatedly, I was very happy.
若暫對。涼風屆節。頃常如何。貧道勞疾多不住(好)耳。信南返(回)不悉(詳) 昔不相面。但企想勤勞。慧明付遺民書者。暫對者。因書見意暫如面對。貧道者。古之沙門謙稱亦少。有病疾或勞心而得。是故云爾。書式有二幅三幅。此廣略二幅爾。略令先知大況故。
八月十五日釋僧肇疏答。服像雖殊妙期不二。江山雖𥾝(遠)理契則鄰(近)所以望途致想虛㦗(懷)有寄 初二句舊說連前。今詳義意。合貫廣初題言疏答。即通答前問故也。次二句形像衣服儒釋兩殊。玄妙歸期終無有二。亦殊途而同歸也。次二句謂南北雖遠。妙理唯一契之則近。后二句既理契即鄰故。南望道途而興想也。
君既遂嘉(善)遁(隱)之志。標越俗之美。獨恬事(物)外。歡足(滿)方寸。每一言集。何嘗不遠喻(曉)林下之雅詠。高致(趣)悠(遠)然清散未期厚自保愛。每因行李數有承問 初四句但敘前書云。既已遂宿心等。嘉遁即周易遁卦九五之辭。每一言集者。謂肇公與南來之人一言集會也。何嘗下長讀至雅詠絕句。林下者指廬山林下。雅詠者。即廬山社眾所作歌頌。如唸佛三昧詠等。意云。論主凡遇南來。雖聊爾一言集會。彼人未曾不遠誦廬山諸公雅作歌詠。以相曉示也。因聞雅詠。見諸公高趣悠然而遠。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 若暫且會面。涼風已至。近來您怎麼樣？貧僧我常因病痛而身體不適。書信託人南返，未能詳盡敘述。 過去我們未曾謀面，但一直仰慕您的勤勉。慧明託人帶給您的信，以及這次的短暫會面，都希望能通過書信表達我的心意，如同親身相見。貧僧，是古代沙門謙虛的自稱，現在已經很少用了。生病或因勞心而得病，所以這樣說。書信的格式有兩幅或三幅，這裡是簡略的兩幅。先讓您大致瞭解情況。
八月十五日釋僧肇的疏答：服飾形象雖然不同，但追求的玄妙境界並無二致。江山雖然遙遠，但如果道理相合，就如同近鄰。所以遙望您的方向，表達我的思念之情。 最初兩句，舊的說法是與前文相連。現在仔細推敲文意，應該與開頭題目的『疏答』相連貫，即是通篇答覆前面的問題。接下來的兩句，形像衣服在儒釋兩家有所不同，但玄妙的歸宿最終沒有兩種，也是殊途同歸。再接下來的兩句，說南北雖然遙遠，但妙理只有一個，如果相互契合就如同近鄰。最後兩句，既然道理相合如同近鄰，所以向南遙望，表達思念之情。
您既然已經實現了歸隱山林的志向，展現了超越世俗的美德，獨自安於世外，內心充滿喜悅。每當有人帶來您的訊息，無不讓我領悟到廬山林下的高雅情懷。高尚的情趣悠遠而清靜，未能相見的日子裡，請多多保重身體。每次遇到送信的人，總會托他們向您問候。 最初四句，只是敘述前信所說，您已經實現了夙願等等。『嘉遁』是周易遁卦九五的辭句。『每一言集』，是指僧肇與從南方來的人說一句話。『何嘗下』要一直讀到『雅詠絕句』。『林下』指的是廬山林下。『雅詠』指的是廬山社眾所作的歌頌，如唸佛三昧詠等。意思是說，論主每次遇到從南方來的人，即使只是簡單的一句話，那些人沒有不遠道背誦廬山諸公所作的雅緻歌詠來相互告知的。因為聽到這些雅詠，可見諸位的高尚情趣是多麼悠遠。
【English Translation】 English version: If we were to meet briefly. The cool breeze marks the season. How have you been lately? This poor monk often suffers from illness and discomfort. I entrust this letter to someone returning south, unable to elaborate in detail. In the past, we have not met face to face, but I have always admired your diligence. The letter that Huiming entrusted to bring to you, and this brief correspondence, both hope to convey my thoughts through writing, as if meeting in person. 'Poor monk' is a humble self-designation used by ancient Shramanas (Buddhist monks), rarely used now. Illness arises from sickness or mental strain, hence the saying. There are two or three formats for letters; this is a concise two-part one. I wish to inform you of the general situation first.
August 15th, Shramana Sengzhao's (Sengzhao, a famous Buddhist scholar) reply: Although the attire and image differ, the pursuit of the profound goal is the same. Although the rivers and mountains are distant, if the principles align, then we are like neighbors. Therefore, I gaze in your direction, expressing my longing. The first two sentences, according to the old interpretation, are connected to the previous text. Now, upon careful consideration of the meaning, they should be connected to the 'reply' in the opening title, which is a comprehensive response to the previous questions. The next two sentences state that the image and clothing differ between Confucianism and Buddhism, but the ultimate destination of the profound is not two, also different paths leading to the same goal. The following two sentences say that although the north and south are far apart, the profound principle is only one; if they are in harmony, they are like neighbors. The last two sentences state that since the principles are in harmony like neighbors, I look south and express my longing.
Since you have achieved your aspiration of retreating into the mountains and forests, displaying virtue that transcends the mundane, dwelling alone in contentment, your heart filled with joy. Whenever someone brings news of you, it never fails to make me understand the elegant sentiments of those in the forests of Mount Lu (Mount Lu, a famous mountain in China). The noble interests are distant and pure. Until we meet again, please take good care of yourself. Every time I encounter someone sending a letter, I always ask them to send my regards. The first four sentences simply narrate what was said in the previous letter, that you have fulfilled your long-cherished wish, etc. 'Jia Dun' is a phrase from the ninth five line of the Dun hexagram in the Book of Changes (I Ching). 'Every word gathered' refers to Sengzhao speaking a word with someone coming from the south. 'Never' should be read all the way to 'elegant chant'. 'Beneath the forest' refers to beneath the forest of Mount Lu. 'Elegant chant' refers to the songs made by the community of Mount Lu, such as the Samadhi chant of Buddha Recitation, etc. The meaning is that every time the master of debate encounters someone coming from the south, even if it is just a simple word, those people never fail to recite the elegant chants made by the gentlemen of Mount Lu from afar to inform each other. Because of hearing these elegant chants, one can see how distant the noble interests of everyone are.
如下云。君與法師應數有文集。因來何少。大底二晉文章句讀多難請詳。清散下可解。
愿彼山僧無恙(憂)道俗通佳 蓮社名流僧俗兼有。
承遠法師之勝常。以為欣慰。雖未清承。然服膺(心)高軌。企佇之勤為日久矣。公以過順之年湛氣彌厲(嚴勁)養徒幽巖抱一衝(深)谷遐邇仰詠何美如之。每亦翹(舉足)想一隅懸庇(蔭)霄岸(際)無由寫(盡)敬致慨良深 清承下未能稟承遠公之清范。然于高軌已服心歸仰。所以企立仰慕時亦日久。公以下但敘前書。抱一者。守道也。不獨景仰之。而又歌詠之也。每亦下自敘一隅者。以晉在東南故。論主每想廬山德化。如懸蓋天際蒙其清蔭。但江山遠阻盡敬無由。致令感慨深也。
君清對終日快有悟心之歡也 但欲寫敬恨我無因。君獨清對終朝悟心之歡。快哉多矣。
即此大眾尋常什法師如宜 草堂義學俊彥五百眾總三千。
秦王道性自然天機邁俗。城塹三寶弘道事務。由是異典勝僧方遠而至。靈鷲之風萃(集)于茲土 謂秦王好法之心。出自天然機亦性也。謂聰睿之性高出俗主。觀通鑑。姚興雖例五胡。實亦英主。城塹下謂護持於法如城如塹。由是下德既如是。善必相應。異典勝僧方且不遠萬里而來也。略如下示。法門勝事無出斯時
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
如下所述。您與法師應該經常有文章合集，為何來信如此之少？大體上，二晉時期的文章句讀多有難解之處，請詳細解釋。清散的部分尚可理解。
希望廬山上的僧人安好無恙，道俗兩界一切都好。蓮社的名流，僧人和俗人都有。
聽說承遠法師的德行日盛，我感到非常欣慰。雖然未能親自拜見，但我內心敬佩他的高尚品德，仰慕之情由來已久。您以年過花甲之年，修養更加精進，教導弟子隱居山林，堅守純一之道，深山峽谷內外的人都仰慕歌頌，這是多麼美好啊！我也常常舉首遙想，希望能在東南一隅，得到您如天空般的庇護。但苦於無法表達我的敬意，感慨良深。『清承下』是指未能稟承承遠公的高尚風範，但對於他的高尚品德，我已內心歸仰。所以企盼仰慕已經很久了。『公以下』只是敘述前信的內容。『抱一』是指堅守道。不僅景仰您，而且歌頌您。『每亦下』是自述，『一隅』是因為晉朝在東南地區。作者常常想到廬山的德化，如同懸掛在天空，蒙受其庇護。但江山遙遠阻隔，無法表達敬意，以致感慨良深。
您獨自清靜地思索，終日沉浸在領悟佛法的喜悅之中，真是快樂啊！只是想表達敬意，卻苦於沒有機會。您獨自清靜地思索，終日沉浸在領悟佛法的喜悅之中，真是太快樂了！
就按現在這樣，大眾按照尋常的什法師的安排就好。草堂義學的俊才五百人，總共有三千人。
秦王姚興的道性是自然天成，他的才智超越世俗。他以城墻般堅固的防禦來護持三寶，弘揚佛法。因此，各種不同的經典和卓越的僧人，都從遙遠的地方來到這裡。靈鷲山的風範匯聚在這片土地上。這是說秦王喜愛佛法的心，是出自天然的，他的才智也是天生的。說他聰慧的本性高出世俗的君主。觀看《資治通鑑》，姚興雖然被歸為五胡，實際上也是一位英明的君主。『城塹下』是說像用城墻和壕溝一樣來護持佛法。『由是下』是說德行既然如此，善果必然相應。各種不同的經典和卓越的僧人，甚至不遠萬里而來。大致如下所示，佛門盛事沒有超過這個時期的。 English version:
As follows. You and the Dharma master should frequently have collected works, why are there so few letters coming? Generally speaking, the punctuation and interpretation of articles from the Two Jin Dynasties are often difficult, please explain in detail. The clear and scattered parts are understandable.
I hope the monks on Mount Lu are safe and sound, and that everything is well with both the monastic and lay communities. The eminent figures of the Lotus Society include both monks and laypeople.
I am very pleased to hear that Dharma Master Cheng Yuan's virtue is growing daily. Although I have not had the opportunity to meet him in person, I admire his noble character in my heart, and my admiration has been long-standing. You, in your advanced years, are becoming more refined in your cultivation, teaching your disciples to live in seclusion in the mountains, upholding the principle of oneness. People inside and outside the deep valleys admire and praise this, how wonderful it is! I also often raise my head and imagine, hoping to receive your sky-like protection in the southeast corner. But I am distressed that I cannot express my respect, and my feelings are very deep. 『Qing Cheng xia』 refers to not being able to inherit the noble example of Cheng Yuan, but I have already submitted and admired his noble character in my heart. Therefore, my anticipation and admiration have been long-standing. 『Gong yi xia』 only narrates the contents of the previous letter. 『Bao yi』 refers to upholding the Dao. Not only do I admire you, but I also praise you. 『Mei yi xia』 is a self-description, 『yi yu』 is because the Jin Dynasty was in the southeast region. The author often thinks of the virtuous influence of Mount Lu, as if hanging in the sky, receiving its protection. But the distant rivers and mountains block the way, making it impossible to express respect, resulting in deep emotion.
You quietly contemplate alone, immersed in the joy of understanding the Dharma all day long, how happy! I just want to express my respect, but I am distressed that I have no opportunity. You quietly contemplate alone, immersed in the joy of understanding the Dharma all day long, how happy it is!
Just as it is now, the assembly should follow the usual arrangements of the Shi Dharma master. There are five hundred outstanding talents in the Thatched Cottage Righteousness School, totaling three thousand people.
King Yao Xing (Qin King) (King of Qin) of the Qin Dynasty's Dao nature is natural, and his talent surpasses the mundane. He protects the Three Jewels (Buddha, Dharma, Sangha) with a defense as solid as city walls, and promotes the Dharma. Therefore, various different scriptures and outstanding monks have come here from afar. The style of Vulture Peak (Grdhrakuta) (mountain in India where Buddha preached) gathers in this land. This says that King Yao Xing's love of the Dharma comes from nature, and his talent is also innate. It says that his intelligent nature surpasses the mundane rulers. Looking at the Zizhi Tongjian (Comprehensive Mirror to Aid in Governance) (a Chinese chronicle), although Yao Xing is classified as one of the Five Barbarians, he is actually a wise ruler. 『Cheng Qian xia』 means to protect the Dharma like using city walls and moats. 『You shi xia』 means that since virtue is like this, good results will surely follow. Various different scriptures and outstanding monks have even come from thousands of miles away. Roughly as shown below, the great events of the Dharma have not exceeded this period.
【English Translation】 As follows. You and the Dharma master should frequently have collected works, why are there so few letters coming? Generally speaking, the punctuation and interpretation of articles from the Two Jin Dynasties are often difficult, please explain in detail. The clear and scattered parts are understandable. I hope the monks on Mount Lu are safe and sound, and that everything is well with both the monastic and lay communities. The eminent figures of the Lotus Society include both monks and laypeople. I am very pleased to hear that Dharma Master Cheng Yuan's (a famous monk) virtue is growing daily. Although I have not had the opportunity to meet him in person, I admire his noble character in my heart, and my admiration has been long-standing. You, in your advanced years, are becoming more refined in your cultivation, teaching your disciples to live in seclusion in the mountains, upholding the principle of oneness. People inside and outside the deep valleys admire and praise this, how wonderful it is! I also often raise my head and imagine, hoping to receive your sky-like protection in the southeast corner. But I am distressed that I cannot express my respect, and my feelings are very deep. 『Qing Cheng xia』 refers to not being able to inherit the noble example of Cheng Yuan, but I have already submitted and admired his noble character in my heart. Therefore, my anticipation and admiration have been long-standing. 『Gong yi xia』 only narrates the contents of the previous letter. 『Bao yi』 refers to upholding the Dao. Not only do I admire you, but I also praise you. 『Mei yi xia』 is a self-description, 『yi yu』 is because the Jin Dynasty was in the southeast region. The author often thinks of the virtuous influence of Mount Lu, as if hanging in the sky, receiving its protection. But the distant rivers and mountains block the way, making it impossible to express respect, resulting in deep emotion. You quietly contemplate alone, immersed in the joy of understanding the Dharma all day long, how happy! I just want to express my respect, but I am distressed that I have no opportunity. You quietly contemplate alone, immersed in the joy of understanding the Dharma all day long, how happy it is! Just as it is now, the assembly should follow the usual arrangements of the Shi Dharma master. There are five hundred outstanding talents in the Thatched Cottage Righteousness School, totaling three thousand people. King Yao Xing (Qin King) (King of Qin) of the Qin Dynasty's Dao nature is natural, and his talent surpasses the mundane. He protects the Three Jewels (Buddha, Dharma, Sangha) with a defense as solid as city walls, and promotes the Dharma. Therefore, various different scriptures and outstanding monks have come here from afar. The style of Vulture Peak (Grdhrakuta) (mountain in India where Buddha preached) gathers in this land. This says that King Yao Xing's love of the Dharma comes from nature, and his talent is also innate. It says that his intelligent nature surpasses the mundane rulers. Looking at the Zizhi Tongjian (Comprehensive Mirror to Aid in Governance) (a Chinese chronicle), although Yao Xing is classified as one of the Five Barbarians, he is actually a wise ruler. 『Cheng Qian xia』 means to protect the Dharma like using city walls and moats. 『You shi xia』 means that since virtue is like this, good results will surely follow. Various different scriptures and outstanding monks have even come from thousands of miles away. Roughly as shown below, the great events of the Dharma have not exceeded this period.
。似移鷲嶺之風集於此土。晉書什傳云。羅什入關。人從化者十室而九。
領公遠舉。乃千載之津樑也。于西域還得方等新經二百餘部。請大乘禪師一人三藏法師一人毗婆沙法師二人。什法師于大石寺。出新至諸經。法藏淵(深)曠(遠)日有異聞。禪師于瓦官寺。教習禪道。門徒數百夙夜匪(不)懈。邕邕(和)肅肅(敬)致(盡趣)可樂矣。三藏法師于中寺。出律藏。本末精悉(詳)若睹初制。毗婆沙法師于石羊。寺出舍利弗阿毗曇。胡本雖未及譯。時問中事發言新奇 領公者。支法領也。據遠公傳似遠公弟子。亦遠公使之令去西域。華嚴梵本等皆此師尋至。恨無正傳。華嚴大鈔略述元由。請大乘禪師者。即佛陀婆陀羅。此云覺賢。據本傳智嚴所請。以賢學禪業于罽賓佛大仙。嚴亦學此固請賢行以傳其事。弘始中入秦。于瓦官寺教習禪道。江南慧嚴慧觀關中玄高等。皆從師受。論主亦在中矣。三藏一人即弗若多羅也。本傳云。罽賓人備通三藏。姚興待以上賓之禮。令譯十誦。功及兼半而亡。曇摩流支續譯方終。毗婆沙法師二人者。曇摩耶舍。曇摩掘多也。俱載梁傳。不繁引之。出新下或自赍梵文。或支公取得者。本末等者。本謂四重。末謂餘篇。新譯精詳如見如來初制之戒也。余文可解。
貧道一生
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 猶如將靈鷲峰（Grdhakuta，又名鷲峰山，是釋迦牟尼佛講經說法之地）的風氣遷移到這片土地。據《晉書·鳩摩羅什傳》記載，鳩摩羅什進入關中后，百姓受其教化者十之八九。 支法領法師的遠行，乃是千載難逢的津樑。他從西域帶回了《方等經》的新譯本二百餘部，並請來大乘禪師一人、三藏法師一人、毗婆沙法師二人。鳩摩羅什法師在大石寺翻譯新到的各種經典，其佛學造詣淵深廣博，每天都有新的見聞。禪師在瓦官寺教授禪道，門徒數百人，日夜勤奮不懈，一片和諧肅敬，令人欣喜。三藏法師在中寺翻譯律藏，內容精詳，彷彿親眼見到佛陀最初制定的戒律。毗婆沙法師在石羊寺翻譯《舍利弗阿毗曇》，雖然胡文字尚未完全翻譯，但時常在討論中發表新奇的見解。支法領法師，就是支法領。根據慧遠法師的傳記，他似乎是慧遠法師的弟子，也是慧遠法師派遣他前往西域的。華嚴經的梵文字等都是這位法師尋找到的，可惜沒有正式的傳記記載。在《華嚴大鈔》中略微敘述了事情的緣由。所請的大乘禪師，就是佛陀跋陀羅（Buddhabhadra），翻譯為覺賢。根據本傳記載，是智嚴法師所請。覺賢在罽賓（Kashmir）的佛大仙處學習禪法。智嚴也學習禪法，因此懇請覺賢前來傳授。弘始年間，覺賢進入關中，在瓦官寺教授禪道。江南的慧嚴、慧觀，關中的玄高等，都跟隨他學習。論主也在其中。三藏法師一人，就是弗若多羅（Punyatara）。本傳記載，他是罽賓人，精通三藏。姚興以對待上賓的禮節款待他，讓他翻譯《十誦律》，工作完成一半時去世，曇摩流支繼續翻譯才最終完成。毗婆沙法師二人，是曇摩耶舍（Dharmayasas）和曇摩掘多（Dharmagupta）。他們的事蹟都記載在《梁傳》中，此處不再贅述。『出新下』，或許是他們自己攜帶梵文，或許是支法領法師取得的。『本末等者』，『本』指的是四重戒，『末』指的是其餘篇章。新翻譯的內容精詳，如同親眼見到如來最初制定的戒律。其餘文字可以自行理解。 貧道一生
【English Translation】 English version: It is as if the spirit of Grdhrakuta (Vulture Peak Mountain, where Shakyamuni Buddha preached) has been transferred to this land. According to the Biography of Kumarajiva in the Book of Jin, after Kumarajiva entered Guanzhong, eight or nine out of ten people were influenced by his teachings. The distant journey of Dharma Master Zhi Faling is a rare bridge for thousands of years. He brought back more than two hundred new translations of the Vaipulya Sutra from the Western Regions, and invited one Mahayana meditation master, one Tripitaka master, and two Vibhasa masters. Dharma Master Kumarajiva translated various newly arrived scriptures at Da Shi Temple. His Buddhist scholarship was profound and vast, with new insights every day. The meditation master taught meditation at Wuguan Temple, with hundreds of disciples diligently practicing day and night, creating a harmonious and respectful atmosphere that was delightful. The Tripitaka master translated the Vinaya Pitaka at Zhong Temple, with detailed content as if witnessing the Buddha's original precepts. The Vibhasa masters translated the Shariputra Abhidhamma at Shiyang Temple. Although the original text had not yet been fully translated, they often expressed novel opinions during discussions. Dharma Master Zhi Faling is Zhi Faling. According to the biography of Dharma Master Huiyuan, he seems to be a disciple of Dharma Master Huiyuan, who also sent him to the Western Regions. The Sanskrit version of the Avatamsaka Sutra, etc., were all found by this master, but unfortunately there is no official biography recording this. The Great Commentary on the Avatamsaka Sutra briefly describes the origin of the matter. The invited Mahayana meditation master is Buddhabhadra, which translates to Awakened Sage. According to the biography, he was invited by Dharma Master Zhiyan. Buddhabhadra studied meditation at Buddha Dasa in Kashmir. Zhiyan also studied meditation, so he earnestly requested Buddhabhadra to come and transmit it. During the Hongshi era, Buddhabhadra entered Guanzhong and taught meditation at Wuguan Temple. Huiyan and Huiguan from Jiangnan, Xuangao from Guanzhong, and others all followed him to study. The author of the treatise was also among them. The one Tripitaka master is Punyatara. The biography records that he was a native of Kashmir and was well-versed in the Tripitaka. Yao Xing treated him with the etiquette of an honored guest and had him translate the Dasasahasrika-vinaya, but he died when the work was half completed. Dharmaruci continued the translation to its completion. The two Vibhasa masters are Dharmayasas and Dharmagupta. Their deeds are recorded in the Liang Biography, so they will not be elaborated here. 'Coming out with new ones' perhaps refers to them bringing Sanskrit texts themselves, or perhaps Zhi Faling obtained them. 'The root and the branch, etc.' refers to the four major precepts as the 'root' and the remaining chapters as the 'branch'. The newly translated content is detailed, as if seeing the Tathagata's original precepts. The remaining text can be understood on your own. Your poor monk's entire life
猥參嘉運。遇茲盛化。自恨不睹釋迦祇桓之集。余復何恨。而慨不得與清勝君子同斯法集耳 論主自慶也。明時難遇而遇。正友難逢而逢。方等深規律論遍睹。遭遇既盛感慶良多。但恨身不廁于祇園。目不接于聖彩。同列身子共聽圓音。而慨下前嘆自已不得清承于遠公。此慨遺民亦不能美預于嘉會。然觀二書似各斗美於一方。然亦兩宣其實也。鬱鬱陳跡燦于傳記。流芳衰世。何其寥寥。
生上人頃在此同止數年。至於言話之際。常相稱詠(贊)中途(路)還(詞緣切回也)南。君得與相見。未更近問。惘悒何言。威道人至得君唸佛三昧詠。並得遠法師三昧詠及序。此作(絕句)興寄既高辭致清婉。能文之士率稱其美。可謂游涉聖門。扣玄關之唱也。君與法師當數有文集。因來何少 生公入關依什數載。與論主同止。亦頻贊遺民也。不得終世相友。故云中途回南。君得下謂生南去亦歸廬阜。故復相見更再也。近亦未再承于書問也。惘悒下慨慕良多口不容言也。傳說通情則生融上首。精難則觀肇第一。良以駢肩八俊聯衡十哲。同氣相求同聲相應。二人莫逆千古共談。威道下蓮社修西方行。故諸賢作唸佛詠。社主亦作。又制序也。威公南來附至關內。此作者指詠及序也。興比興也。寄託也。致猶理也。謂所寄清興既高
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 我非常幸運，趕上了這個昌盛的時代。我遺憾的是沒能親眼見到釋迦牟尼在祇桓精舍的聚會（釋迦祇桓之集：指釋迦牟尼佛在祇樹給孤獨園的弘法集會），除此之外我還有什麼可遺憾的呢？只是感嘆不能和像清勝君子一樣的人一同參與這樣的佛法集會啊——這是論主的自我慶幸。明時難得而能遇到，正友難求而能相逢，深奧的方等經典和精密的規律理論都能遍覽。遭遇如此盛況，感慨慶幸良多。只是遺憾自己不能身處祇園精舍，親眼目睹聖者的風采，像舍利弗（身子）一樣共同聆聽圓滿的佛法。又感嘆自己不能像陶淵明（遠公）那樣清高地繼承先賢的遺風。這種感嘆就像遺民無法參與盛大的聚會一樣。然而，觀這兩本書，似乎各自在一個方面爭奇鬥豔，但也都在宣揚佛法的真諦。那些光輝燦爛的往事，被記載在傳記中，在衰敗的時代流傳著芬芳，多麼稀少啊！ 生上人（生上人：指僧人）先前在這裡一同住了幾年，在談話的時候，常常互相稱讚陶淵明（中途還南：指陶淵明中途返回南方）。您（君）能夠和他相見，卻沒有進一步詢問他的情況，心中茫然若失，不知該說什麼。威道人（威道人：指僧人）到來，帶來了您的唸佛三昧詠，以及遠法師（遠法師：指慧遠法師）的三昧詠和序。這些絕句，興致高遠，辭藻清麗婉轉，有文采的人都稱讚它的美好，可以說是遊歷聖賢之門，叩響玄妙之關的歌唱。您和慧遠法師應該有很多文集，為什麼送來的這麼少呢？——生公（生公：指僧人）進入關中，依附鳩摩羅什（什）數年，和論主一同居住，也常常讚美遺民。不能終生相伴，所以說中途返回南方。『君得下』是說生公南去後又回到廬山，所以又再次相見。『近』也是沒有再次收到書信問候。『惘悒下』是感慨仰慕良多，難以用語言表達。傳說精通佛理，生公是第一，精通佛學理論，鳩摩羅什的第一。是因為他們並肩而立，如同八俊和十哲一樣，同氣相求，同聲相應。二人情誼深厚，千古共談。『威道下』是因為蓮社修習西方凈土法門，所以諸位賢士作唸佛詠，社主慧遠法師也作了，又作了序。威公南來，附帶送到了關內。『此作』是指唸佛詠和序。『興』是比興，『寄』是寄託，『致』是理，是說所寄託的清雅興致很高。
【English Translation】 English version: I am extremely fortunate to have encountered this flourishing era. My regret lies in not having personally witnessed Śākyamuni's assembly at Jetavana Monastery (Śākyagriva: refers to Śākyamuni Buddha's Dharma assembly at Jetavana Anathapindika Monastery), what else could I possibly regret? It is only a lament that I cannot participate in such a Dharma gathering with virtuous gentlemen like Qing Sheng. This is the author's self-congratulation. It is rare to encounter a bright era, yet I have. It is difficult to find true friends, yet I have. I can extensively study the profound Vaipulya sutras and precise Vinaya theories. Encountering such prosperity, I feel much gratitude and joy. It is only regrettable that I cannot be in Jetavana Monastery, personally witnessing the splendor of the saints, and listening to the perfect Dharma like Śāriputra (Śāriputra). I also lament that I cannot inherit the legacy of the predecessors with the same purity as Tao Yuanming (Yuangong). This lament is like that of the remnants of the previous dynasty who could not participate in the grand gathering. However, observing these two books, it seems that each is competing for beauty in one aspect, but both are proclaiming the truth of the Dharma. Those brilliant past events are recorded in biographies, spreading fragrance in a declining era, how rare! The Venerable Sheng (Venerable Sheng: refers to a monk) previously lived here together for several years. During conversations, we often praised Tao Yuanming (Midway Returning South: refers to Tao Yuanming returning to the South midway). You (Jun) were able to meet him, but did not further inquire about his situation, feeling lost and unsure of what to say. The Daoist Wei (Daoist Wei: refers to a monk) arrived, bringing your 'Ode to Samadhi of Buddha Recitation', as well as Master Yuan's (Master Yuan: refers to Master Huiyuan) 'Ode to Samadhi' and its preface. These quatrains have lofty aspirations and elegant and refined language. Scholars all praise their beauty, saying they are songs of traversing the gate of the sages and knocking on the gate of the profound. You and Master Huiyuan should have many collections of writings, why have so few been sent? Sheng Gong (Sheng Gong: refers to a monk) entered Guanzhong, relying on Kumārajīva (Shi) for several years, and lived with the author, often praising the remnants of the previous dynasty. Unable to be friends for life, hence the saying 'returning south midway'. 'Jun De Xia' means that after Sheng Gong went south, he returned to Mount Lu, so they met again. 'Recently' also means that there has been no further correspondence. 'Wang Yi Xia' expresses much admiration and longing, difficult to express in words. It is said that Sheng Gong was the best at understanding Buddhist principles, and Kumārajīva was the best at Buddhist theory. It is because they stood shoulder to shoulder, like the Eight Jun and Ten Philosophers, seeking each other with similar spirits and responding with similar voices. The friendship between the two is profound, and they are discussed together for thousands of years. 'Wei Dao Xia' is because the Lotus Society practiced the Western Pure Land Dharma, so the virtuous ones composed odes to Buddha recitation, and the leader of the society, Huiyuan, also composed them, and also wrote a preface. Daoist Wei came south, bringing them to Guanzhong. 'This work' refers to the odes to Buddha recitation and the preface. 'Xing' is metaphor, 'Ji' is entrustment, 'Zhi' is reason, meaning that the refined aspirations entrusted are very high.
。亦令辭理清婉。婉美也。能文下謂關中善文什之人皆稱其美。可謂下論主贊之。謂作詠眾賢優遊如來之門庭。扣擊玄關之唱詠。君與下因見詠序。宜多有文集。何故來者少耶。
什法師以午年出維摩經。貧道時預聽次。參承之暇輒復條記成言(絕句)以為註解。辭雖不文然義承有本。今因信持一本往南。君閑詳(絕句)試可取看 午年者。即弘始八年丙午也。出維下謂什公且譯且講。論主參譯而聽。及承稟之暇輒又條貫記錄什公已成之言。註解一經。蓋謙也。師序云。余以暗短時預聽次。雖思乏參玄。然粗得文意。輒順所聞。為之註解。略記成言述而無作。辭雖下謙也。有本者。謂親承什公。君閑下瑤本云。詳議取看甚通。
來問婉(美)切(當)難為郢人。貧道思不關微。兼拙於筆語。且至趣無言。言必乖趣。云云不已(止)竟何所辨。聊以狂言。示酬來旨耳 郢者。州名。莊子略云。郢人堊漫其鼻端。薄如蠅翼。使大匠斫之。匠者乃運斤成風。斤下堊盡而鼻不傷。郢人亦立不失容。意謂。斫者雖妙而承者尤難。以喻公之難美而切當。譬匠者妙斫。論主答之難如郢人。蓋謙謙爾。云云者。言說也。言多喪真。故云爾也。聊以下許也。
疏云。稱聖心冥寂理極同無。雖處有名之中。而遠與無名。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 也使得文辭和義理清晰委婉，所謂委婉美好。能文之士都說關中擅長文章的人都稱讚它的美好，可以說是下論主讚揚它。說寫作歌詠眾賢在如來門庭中優遊，扣擊玄關的唱詠。您因此見到詠序，應該有很多文集，為什麼來的人這麼少呢？ 鳩摩羅什法師在午年翻譯《維摩經》，貧道當時參與聽講。在參承的空閑，就條記成言（絕句）作為註解。文辭雖然不華麗，但是義理承接有本。現在因為送信的人拿著一本往南去，您可以空閑時詳細看看（絕句），或許可以採用。午年，就是弘始八年丙午。出維下說鳩摩羅什公一邊翻譯一邊講解，論主參與翻譯並聽講，以及在承稟的空閑，就又條貫記錄鳩摩羅什公已經說成的話，註解這部經。大概是謙虛吧。師序說：『我因為愚昧短淺，有時參與聽講。雖然思慮缺乏參悟玄理的能力，但大致懂得文意。就順著所聽到的，為之註解。略記成言，只是述說而沒有創作。』文辭雖然下謙虛。有本，是指親自承接鳩摩羅什公的教誨。您空閑時下瑤本說：『詳細議論看看』，非常通順。 來問委婉（美好）切（當），難以成為郢人。貧道思慮不涉及精微，又拙於筆語。而且至高的趣味是無法用語言表達的，用語言表達必定會違背趣味。云云不已（止），最終辨明什麼呢？姑且用狂妄的言語，來表示酬答您的旨意罷了。郢，是州名。《莊子·徐無鬼》略說：『郢人在鼻尖上塗抹白灰，薄得像蒼蠅的翅膀，讓大匠用斧頭砍掉它。匠人於是揮動斧頭，斧頭下白灰燼除而鼻子沒有受傷。郢人也站立不動，沒有改變臉色。』意思是說，砍的人雖然巧妙，但是承受的人尤其難。用來比喻您的難以美好而切當，譬如匠人巧妙地砍削，論主回答的難度就像郢人。大概是謙虛吧。云云，是言說。話說多了會喪失真意，所以這樣說。姑且以下是許諾。 疏文說：稱聖人的心境冥寂，道理達到極點，與『無』相同。雖然處於『有名』之中，卻遠離『無名』。
【English Translation】 English version: It also makes the words and principles clear and graceful, so-called graceful and beautiful. Literati all say that the people in Guanzhong who are good at writing all praise its beauty. It can be said that the author praises it. It is said that writing poems and singing about the sages leisurely in the gate of Tathagata, knocking on the mysterious gate. You therefore see the preface to the poems, and there should be many collections of essays. Why are there so few people coming? Dharma Master Kumarajiva translated the Vimalakirti Sutra in the Wu year. This poor monk participated in the lectures at that time. In my spare time, I took notes of the accomplished words (quatrains) as annotations. Although the words are not ornate, the meaning is inherited from the original. Now, because a messenger is taking a copy to the south, you can take a detailed look at it (quatrains) in your spare time, and perhaps you can adopt it. The Wu year is the Bingwu year of the eighth year of Hongshi. It is said that Master Kumarajiva translated and lectured at the same time. The author participated in the translation and listened to the lectures, and in his spare time, he recorded Master Kumarajiva's accomplished words and annotated this sutra. It is probably humility. The preface says: 'Because of my ignorance and shallowness, I sometimes participate in the lectures. Although my thoughts lack the ability to understand the profound principles, I roughly understand the meaning of the text. I follow what I have heard and annotate it. I briefly record the accomplished words, only narrating and not creating.' The words are humble. 'Having a basis' means personally receiving Master Kumarajiva's teachings. When you are free, the Yao version says: 'Discuss and see in detail,' which is very smooth. Coming to ask for gracefulness (beauty) and appropriateness (accuracy) is difficult to be like the people of Ying. This poor monk's thoughts do not involve subtlety, and I am clumsy in writing. Moreover, the highest interest cannot be expressed in words, and expressing it in words will surely violate the interest. Speaking endlessly, what will be clarified in the end? Let me use wild words to show my response to your intention. Ying (郢) is the name of a state. Zhuangzi's Xu Wugui briefly says: 'A person from Ying smeared white ash on the tip of his nose, as thin as a fly's wing, and asked a great craftsman to chop it off with an axe. The craftsman then wielded the axe, and the white ash was completely removed without injuring the nose. The person from Ying also stood still without changing his expression.' The meaning is that although the chopper is skillful, the receiver is especially difficult. It is used to compare your difficulty in being beautiful and appropriate, like a craftsman skillfully chopping, and the difficulty of the author's answer is like the person from Ying. It is probably humility. 'Speaking endlessly' means speaking. Speaking too much will lose the true meaning, so it is said. 'Let me' below is a promise. The commentary says: It is said that the sage's mind is silent and the principle reaches the extreme, being the same as 'non-being'. Although it is in 'being', it is far away from 'non-name'.
同斯理之玄固常所迷昧者矣。以此為懷。自可忘言。內得取定方寸。復何足以人情之異而求聖心之異乎 自疏云。至者矣。即前劉公就敘論旨之言。以此下三句許其所得無差。復何足下責其迷昧復求心異。通斯意云。既知聖心冥寂有無一致。自可外忘權實之異名。內得聖心之無異中心印定不復求異可也。何故復以人情分別之心。而求聖心權實兩異乎。
疏曰。談者謂窮虛極數妙盡冥符。則寂照之名故是定慧之體耳。若心體自然虛怕獨感。則群數之應固以幾乎息矣(上舉難下出意)意謂妙盡冥符不可以定慧為名。虛怕獨感不可稱群數以息 出問大意也。義如前釋。
兩言雖殊妙用常一。跡我而乖。在聖不殊也 兩言者。瑤和尚云。妙盡冥符為一言。虛怕獨感為一言。源公指權實為兩言。義意甚同今依之。前兩句直約聖心權實無異。后二句潛責求異。跡者。謂二智照理達事之殊跡。但我人情分別為異。非聖心權實兩殊。我雖通稱。且屬劉公。
何者(徴)夫聖人玄心默照理極同無。既曰。為同同無不極。何有同無之極。而有定慧之名。定慧之名非同外之稱也 答前初難。初四句謂妙盡冥符寂照雙絕。何有下二句反責當此同無極處。豈容定慧異名。問曰若如是者。何故前云寂即用用即寂耶。下釋云。定慧
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：這正是那些對深奧道理理解不透徹的人常常感到迷惑的地方。如果能以此為懷，自然可以達到忘言的境界，內心就能獲得確定的主張。又何必因為人情的差異，而去追求聖人內心的差異呢？ 自疏中說：『達到這種境界的人啊！』就是前面劉公就敘述宗旨所說的話。用這以下的三句話來肯定他所得到的理解沒有偏差。又何必責備他的迷惑，再去追求聖人內心的差異呢？貫通這個意思就是說，既然知道聖人的心境是冥寂的，有和無是一致的，自然可以對外忘卻權宜和真實的異名，對內獲得聖人內心沒有差異的印證，中心已經確定，不再追求差異就可以了。為什麼還要用人情分別的心，而去追求聖人內心權宜和真實兩種不同的方面呢？ 疏中說：『談論的人認為窮盡虛空，達到極數，精妙地達到與冥符相合的境界，那麼寂照（寂靜和覺照）的名稱本來就是定慧（禪定和智慧）的本體啊。』如果心體自然虛靜，獨自感應，那麼對各種事物的應對本來就幾乎停止了（上面提出疑問，下面闡述意圖）。意思是說，精妙地達到與冥符相合的境界，不能用定慧來命名；虛靜獨自感應，不能用各種事物的應對停止來稱呼。』 這是提出疑問的大意，義理如同前面的解釋。 兩種說法雖然不同，但精妙的作用常常是一致的。順著我（的理解）就會產生偏差，但在聖人那裡卻沒有差異。 『兩種說法』，瑤和尚說：『精妙地達到與冥符相合為一種說法，虛靜獨自感應為一種說法。』源公認為權宜和真實是兩種說法。義理非常相同，現在依從他的說法。前面兩句直接說明聖人的心境權宜和真實沒有差異，後面兩句暗中責備追求差異。『跡』，是指二智（根本智和后得智）照理達事的不同表現。只是我（們）人情分別認為有差異，而不是聖人的心境權宜和真實兩種方面有差異。『我』雖然是通稱，但主要指劉公。 『為什麼呢？』（設問）聖人的玄妙心境默默照耀，在理上達到與『無』相同。既然說，因為與『無』相同，所以沒有窮盡。哪裡會有與『無』相同的窮盡，而有定慧的名稱呢？定慧的名稱不是在與『無』相同之外的稱謂啊！』 這是回答前面的第一個疑問。前四句說精妙地達到與冥符相合的境界，寂照雙重斷絕。後面兩句反過來責問，當在這個與『無』相同的極點，怎麼能容許定慧的異名呢？問：如果像這樣，為什麼前面說寂就是用，用就是寂呢？下面解釋說：定慧（禪定和智慧）。
【English Translation】 English version: This is precisely what those who do not thoroughly understand profound principles often find confusing. If one can keep this in mind, one can naturally reach a state of forgetting words, and the mind can obtain a firm conviction. Why then seek differences in the saint's mind because of differences in human emotions? The commentary says: 'Those who reach this state!' This refers to what Duke Liu said earlier in describing the purpose. The following three sentences affirm that his understanding is without deviation. Why then blame his confusion and seek differences in the saint's mind? To understand this meaning is to say that since we know the saint's mind is serene and still, and that existence and non-existence are one, we can naturally outwardly forget the different names of expedient and real, and inwardly obtain the confirmation that the saint's mind has no differences. Once the center is determined, there is no need to seek differences. Why then use the discriminating mind of human emotions to seek two different aspects of the saint's mind, expedient and real? The commentary says: 'Those who discuss say that exhausting emptiness, reaching the extreme of numbers, and subtly attaining harmony with the unseen, then the names of stillness and illumination (寂照) are originally the substance of samadhi and wisdom (定慧).' If the mind-essence is naturally empty and still, and responds alone, then the response to all things would naturally almost cease (above raises the question, below explains the intention). The intention is that subtly attaining harmony with the unseen cannot be named as samadhi and wisdom; empty stillness and solitary response cannot be called the cessation of response to all things.' This is the general idea of raising the question, the meaning is as explained before. Although the two statements are different, their subtle function is always the same. Following me (my understanding) will lead to deviation, but there is no difference in the saint. 'Two statements,' Monk Yao said: 'Subtly attaining harmony with the unseen is one statement, empty stillness and solitary response is one statement.' Duke Yuan considered expedient and real as two statements. The meaning is very similar, and now I follow his statement. The first two sentences directly state that there is no difference between expedient and real in the saint's mind, and the last two sentences subtly blame the pursuit of differences. 'Traces' (跡) refers to the different manifestations of the two wisdoms (二智, fundamental wisdom and acquired wisdom) illuminating principle and reaching affairs. It is only that we, with human emotions, discriminate and consider them different, but it is not that there are two different aspects of expedient and real in the saint's mind. 'I' although is a general term, mainly refers to Duke Liu. 'Why?' (rhetorical question) The saint's profound mind silently illuminates, and in principle reaches the same as 'non-existence' (無). Since it is said that because it is the same as 'non-existence,' there is no end. Where would there be an end to being the same as 'non-existence,' and have the name of samadhi and wisdom? The name of samadhi and wisdom is not a designation outside of being the same as 'non-existence!' This is the answer to the first question above. The first four sentences say that subtly attaining harmony with the unseen, stillness and illumination are doubly severed. The last two sentences conversely question, when at this extreme point of being the same as 'non-existence,' how can the different names of samadhi and wisdom be allowed? Question: If it is like this, why did you say before that stillness is use, and use is stillness? The following explains: Samadhi and wisdom (定慧).
之名非同外之稱也。意云。定慧之名即同無之寂照。豈離同外別有二名。
若稱生同內有稱非同。若稱生同外稱非我也 遣妄執也。言生者。恐妄計云。同非定慧但定慧生於同內。下遣云有稱非同謂有定慧兩名。依名取相便非同也。若稱生同外者。謂定慧二名同異而出。下復破云。稱非我也。我指同無。無得之般若焉有同無之外。別生定慧之名哉。
又聖心虛微妙絕常境。感無不應會無不通。冥機潛運(動)其用不勤群數之應。亦何為而息耶 答前第二難也。初二句正智無相亦無為也。次四句量智應有亦無不為也。后二句反責。清凈忘照故曰虛微。非色非心可云妙絕。冥猶默也。深也。機目智也潛亦冥潛。如量無思不應而應。智用何勤。故韋提懇切。運通而出於宮中。勝鬘仰祈。應念而現於空際。智則即實而權身亦即真而應。而言幾息。是何言歟。
且夫心之有也以(因)其有有有不自有 自此已下答前二智體殊。謂正答心異。兼通有知也。初句標妄。次二句辨釋。諸心心所由四緣起。緣有之有故不能自有。
故聖心不有有不有有故(躡上)有無有(非有)有無有故。則無無(非無)無無故聖心不有不無不有不無。其神乃虛 初句承前妄心有有。以顯聖心非緣有而有。故不有有。躡此三字展
轉釋。成非有非無。中道莫寄。至虛至寂之心。文相可解。
何者 亦雙徴真妄。
夫有也無也心之影響也。言也像也影響之所攀緣也 欲明聖智雙非。先示有無妄念。為下雙非義因。初二句中影因質起響自聲騰。謂心緣有無之時。有無之相是心之影響。心者如質如聲。言也下謂心緣有無二境復生言象。言象既立心於其中。計有計無追攀緣慮也。此同起信由心現境。智復分別。相續執取等。大乘二十頌略云。如人畫羅叉自畫還自畏。
有無既廢則心無影響。影響既淪(喪)則言象莫測。言象莫測則道絕群(諸)方(象)道絕群方故。能窮靈極數。窮靈極數乃曰妙盡。妙盡之道本(休)乎無奇 初句躡前不有不無也。連下三句相躡。但翻前妄心。後有八句亦相因而成。至妙盡無寄。心境亡寂用泯皆無寄。擬大意連后一唱。只就難辭躡而通之。顯二非殊也。
夫無寄在(因)乎冥寂。冥寂故虛以通之。妙盡存(因)乎極數。極數故數以應之。數以應之故動與事會。虛以通之故道超名外 初三句冥真。次三句成權。環而釋之。意顯非異文亦尤難。今細示之。問何得無寄。答由冥寂故。冥寂即窮虛也。問何得妙盡。答由極數故。數以應之者。即實成權也。了俗由於證真。證真不離諸數。豈非即應耶。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 轉釋：成就非有非無的狀態，中道的境界不可寄託。達到至虛至寂的心境，可以通過文字相來理解。
何者？這也是同時否定真和妄。
所謂『有』或『無』，都是心的影響。言語和表象，都是心之影響所攀緣的對象。想要闡明聖智的『雙非』，首先揭示有無的虛妄念頭，作為下面『雙非』的義理基礎。最初兩句中，影響因本體而生起，聲響因聲音而傳播。意思是說，當心緣于『有』或『無』的時候，『有』和『無』的相狀就是心的影響。心就像本體和聲音。『言也』以下是說，心緣于『有』和『無』這兩種境界，又產生言語和表象。言語和表象一旦確立，心就在其中，計較『有』或『無』，追逐攀緣思慮。這和《起信論》中『由心現境，智復分別，相續執取』等說法相同。《大乘二十頌》略云：『如人畫羅剎（梵語：Rākṣasa，惡鬼），自畫還自畏。』
『有』和『無』既然被廢除，那麼心就沒有影響；影響既然消失，那麼言語和表象就無法測度。言語和表象無法測度，那麼道路就超越了一切方向。道路超越了一切方向，所以能夠窮盡靈妙的極限。窮盡靈妙的極限就叫做『妙盡』。『妙盡』的道路本來就歸於無奇。
第一句承接前面『不有不無』的說法。連線下面的三句互相承接。只是翻轉前面的虛妄心。後面有八句也是互相因而成就。達到『妙盡』就沒有寄託，心境消亡寂滅，作用泯滅，都沒有寄託。擬定大意，連線後面一唱，只是就著難辭承接而貫通它，顯示『二非』的殊勝。
沒有寄託在于冥寂，因為冥寂所以虛空而能通達它；妙盡存在於極數，因為極數所以能夠用數來應和它。用數來應和它，所以行動與事物相合；用虛空來通達它，所以道超越了名稱之外。
最初三句闡明真，其次三句成就權。循環地解釋它，意思是顯示『非異』，文字也尤其難懂。現在詳細地說明它。問：怎麼能沒有寄託？答：由於冥寂的緣故。冥寂就是窮盡虛空。問：怎麼能達到妙盡？答：由於極數的緣故。用數來應和它，就是從實成就權。瞭解俗諦是由於證悟真諦，證悟真諦不離一切數，難道不是即應嗎？
【English Translation】 English version: Explanation: Achieving the state of neither existence nor non-existence, the Middle Way has nowhere to be entrusted. Reaching the state of utmost emptiness and tranquility, the literal meaning can be understood.
What is it? It also simultaneously negates both truth and delusion.
What is called 'existence' or 'non-existence' are both influences of the mind. Words and images are what the influences of the mind cling to. If you want to clarify the 'dual negation' of sacred wisdom, you must first reveal the false thoughts of existence and non-existence as the basis for the meaning of 'dual negation' below. In the first two sentences, the influence arises from the substance, and the sound spreads from the voice. It means that when the mind is attached to 'existence' or 'non-existence', the appearances of 'existence' and 'non-existence' are the influences of the mind. The mind is like substance and sound. 'Words' below means that when the mind is attached to the two realms of 'existence' and 'non-existence', words and images are produced again. Once words and images are established, the mind is in it, calculating 'existence' or 'non-existence', pursuing clinging thoughts. This is the same as the saying in the Awakening of Faith, 'The mind manifests the environment, wisdom distinguishes, and continuously grasps.' The Twenty Verses on the Great Vehicle briefly say: 'Like a person painting a Rākṣasa (Sanskrit: Rākṣasa, demon), he is afraid of what he paints himself.'
Since 'existence' and 'non-existence' have been abolished, then the mind has no influence; since the influence has disappeared, then words and images cannot be measured. If words and images cannot be measured, then the path transcends all directions. Because the path transcends all directions, it can exhaust the ultimate of spiritual subtlety. Exhausting the ultimate of spiritual subtlety is called 'wonderful exhaustion'. The path of 'wonderful exhaustion' originally returns to no strangeness.
The first sentence continues the previous statement of 'neither existence nor non-existence'. The following three sentences are connected to each other. It just reverses the previous false mind. The following eight sentences are also accomplished by mutual cause. Reaching 'wonderful exhaustion' has no entrustment, the mind and environment disappear into silence, and the function disappears, all without entrustment. Propose the general idea, connect the following chant, just follow the difficult words to connect and penetrate it, showing the superiority of 'dual negation'.
Having no entrustment lies in profound silence, because of profound silence, it is empty and can penetrate it; wonderful exhaustion exists in the ultimate number, because of the ultimate number, it can respond with numbers. Responding with numbers, so actions and things are in harmony; using emptiness to penetrate it, so the Tao transcends names.
The first three sentences clarify the truth, and the next three sentences accomplish the expedient. Explaining it in a cycle, the meaning is to show 'non-difference', and the words are especially difficult to understand. Now explain it in detail. Question: How can there be no entrustment? Answer: Because of profound silence. Profound silence is exhausting emptiness. Question: How can wonderful exhaustion be achieved? Answer: Because of the ultimate number. Responding with numbers is to accomplish the expedient from the real. Understanding the mundane truth is due to realizing the ultimate truth, and realizing the ultimate truth is inseparable from all numbers, is it not immediate response?
此中妙盡非謂宰割。悟其性空即是盡義。次二句應事。后二句合。謂心境冥寂非名非相。只就劉難。二知何殊。
道超名外因謂之無。動與事會。因謂之有。因謂之有者。應夫真有強謂之然耳。彼何然哉 此論有無。含有二義。一有體無體之有無。二有知無知之有無。前後例同。此中之意為超名相。故曰無。無豈斷滅為與事會故曰有。有豈常存。然般若約表四句。皆是約遮四句皆非。表以顯德遮以離過。故勝熱四火居之四邊。中有刀山取之則四焚。虛心則通照。分別則割體。忘懷則斷惑。後有四句復拂。以真智妙存且以有名之。此猶剩之。真豈屬有。以後例前無亦強謂。
故經云。聖智無知而無所不知。無為而無所不為 舍利品云。菩薩行般若波羅蜜。知一切眾生心亦不得。眾生乃至知者見者亦不得。照明品云。般若能照一切法畢竟凈故。三慧品云。一切無所為般若亦無所為等。此中合集前後。引之以顯聖心知而又為。證權實不異也。兼證有知無知一致。
此無言無相寂滅之道。豈曰有而為有無而為無。動而乖靜靜而廢用也 初句顯體下皆正責。有無不羈。何云有知。動靜不乖。何云心異。已上答前二智體殊。此下方答二智有知。亦正答有知潛答心異。以第一難中顯難心異潛難無知。故答中亦顯答
心異。潛答有知。難中以相次而起。答中亦相次而答也。
而今談者多即言以定旨。尋大方而徴(求)隅。懷前識以標(指)玄。存(執)所存之必當 初句泛指時輩。亦在問者。次句隨聲取義。過失尤多不必雷同。故云多等。多字貫下諸句。次二句大方前識俱出老氏。彼云。大方無隅。又云。前識者道之華。如人慾游大方反求廉隅。以況欲悟非有非無之般若。反於有知無知中求。前識即惑取也。存分別之識標。指無分別玄妙之智。恰與相反。后句所存者。謂胸臆所見也。執胸臆之見。定為允當。
是以聞聖有知謂之有心。聞聖無知謂等太虛 由前四謬。成此二見。
有無之境邊見所存(示過)豈是處中莫二之道乎 不合中道。反墮斷常。
何者萬物雖殊。然性本常一。不可而物。然非不物 初二句緣生故萬殊。性空故常一。二諦之境非一非異。下二句緣生無性故。不可為物。無性緣生故。亦非不物。
可物於物。則名相異陳不物於物。則物而即真 初二句迷也。可謂取著則成於名相。名相紛紜不達三假。故云異陳。賢首大師云。真空滯於心首。恒為緣慮之場。實際居於目前。翻成名相之境。后二句悟也。物非主宰。受取亦空不捨名相。而入圓成后句恐誤。宜云即物而真。
是
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 心意不同。私下回答好像有知覺。提問時一個接一個地提出，回答時也一個接一個地回答。
現在談論佛法的人，大多根據言辭來確定宗旨，尋找廣闊的道理卻去尋求角落，懷抱著先前的認識來標榜玄妙，堅持自己所堅持的就一定是正確的。』初句泛指當時的人，也包括提問的人。次句隨著聲音來理解意義，過失尤其多，不必雷同。所以說『多』等。『多』字貫穿下面的句子。接下來的兩句，『大方』和『前識』都出自老子。《老子》說：『大方無隅。』又說：『前識者，道之華。』比如有人想要遊覽廣闊的地方，反而去尋找角落，用以比喻想要領悟非有非無的般若智慧，反而從有知無知中去尋求。『前識』就是迷惑的取捨。執著于分別的意識，來標榜、指引無分別的玄妙智慧，恰恰相反。後面的句子，『所存者』，指的是胸中所見。執著于胸中的見解，認為一定是正確的。
因此，聽到聖人說『有知』，就認為是有心；聽到聖人說『無知』，就認為等同於太虛。』由前面的四種謬誤，形成了這兩種見解。
『有』和『無』的境界，是邊見所執著的地方，怎麼能是處於中道、不落兩端的道理呢？』不符合中道，反而墮入斷見和常見。
『為什麼呢？萬物雖然不同，但本性本來是常一的。不可以把它看作實物，但也不是不是實物。』前兩句說的是，因為因緣生起，所以萬物千差萬別；因為自性本空，所以本來是常一的。這是二諦的境界，非一非異。后兩句說的是，因為因緣生起而沒有自性，所以不可以把它看作實物；因為沒有自性而因緣生起，所以也不是不是實物。
『可以把它看作實物，那麼名相就會差異地陳列；不把它看作實物，那麼實物就是真如。』前兩句是迷惑。如果可以執著于實物，那麼就會形成名相。名相紛紜複雜，不能通達三假，所以說『異陳』。賢首大師說：『真空滯留在心頭，永遠是緣慮的場所；實際就在眼前，反而成了名相的境界。』后兩句是覺悟。實物不是主宰，接受和取捨也是空性的，不捨棄名相，而進入圓成實性。后一句恐怕有誤，應該說『即物而真』。
是
【English Translation】 English version: Different minds. Secretly answering as if having knowledge. Questions arise one after another in the difficulty, and answers also follow one after another.
Those who discuss [the Dharma] nowadays mostly determine the main point based on words, seeking corners while searching for the vast principle, embracing prior knowledge to label the profound, insisting that what they hold is certainly correct. The first sentence generally refers to contemporaries, including those who ask questions. The second sentence takes the meaning according to the sound, with particularly many errors, and there is no need to follow suit. Therefore, it says 'mostly' etc. The word 'mostly' runs through the following sentences. The next two sentences, 'vast principle' and 'prior knowledge,' both come from Lao Tzu. He said, 'The vast principle has no corners.' He also said, 'Prior knowledge is the flower of the Tao.' It is like someone wanting to travel to a vast place but instead seeking corners, which is like wanting to realize the Prajna (wisdom) of neither existence nor non-existence, but instead seeking it in knowledge and non-knowledge. 'Prior knowledge' is deluded grasping. Holding onto the discriminating consciousness to label and point to the profound wisdom of non-discrimination is exactly the opposite. The later sentence, 'what is held,' refers to what is seen in the mind. Holding onto the views in the mind and determining them to be correct.
Therefore, hearing the sage say 'having knowledge,' they think it is having a mind; hearing the sage say 'no knowledge,' they think it is equal to the great void. These two views are formed from the previous four errors.
The realm of 'existence' and 'non-existence' is where biased views are held. How can it be the way of being in the middle, not falling into extremes?' It does not accord with the Middle Way, but instead falls into nihilism and eternalism.
Why? Although the myriad things are different, their nature is originally constant and one. It cannot be regarded as a real thing, but it is also not not a real thing.' The first two sentences say that because of conditioned arising, the myriad things are different; because of the emptiness of self-nature, it is originally constant and one. This is the realm of the Two Truths, neither one nor different. The latter two sentences say that because of conditioned arising and the absence of self-nature, it cannot be regarded as a real thing; because of the absence of self-nature and conditioned arising, it is also not not a real thing.
If it can be regarded as a real thing, then names and forms will be displayed differently; if it cannot be regarded as a real thing, then the real thing is Suchness.' The first two sentences are delusion. If one can grasp onto real things, then names and forms will be formed. Names and forms are complex and cannot penetrate the Three Falsities, so it says 'displayed differently.' Master Xian Shou said, 'True emptiness stagnates in the mind, and is forever a place of conditioned thoughts; actuality is right before the eyes, but instead becomes a realm of names and forms.' The latter two sentences are enlightenment. Real things are not the master, and acceptance and grasping are also empty, not abandoning names and forms, but entering into perfect reality. The latter sentence is probably wrong, and should say 'immediately the thing is Suchness.'
Is
以聖人不物(取)於物。不非物於物。不物於物。物非有也。不非物於物。物非無也 初二句從緣非有故。云不物。緣起不無故。云不非等。后四句承前以辨中道。
非有所以不取。非無所以不捨。不捨故妙存即真。不取故名相靡因。名相靡因非有知也。妙存即真非無知也 不取者。名相本空取之不得故。不捨者。實相妙存離之不得故。次四句中由不捨故。即事而真湛然無相故。曰妙存。由不取故。名相無因而起。又名與相相因而生。茍不取著相因自亡。后四句中躡前釋成雙非。非有知者。所知空故。非無知者。心妙存故。
故經云。般若於諸法無取無舍無知無不知。此攀緣之外。絕心之域而欲以有無詰者。不亦遠乎 放光第十三中文具云。般若波羅蜜于諸法等無知下覆在別卷。如前引。以五陰乃至十八不共等。相空故無取。無取則無知。妙存故無舍。無舍則無不知也。此攀緣下論辭舉體而責。可知。
請詰(問)夫陳有無者。夫智之生也。極于相內。法本無相聖智何知。世稱無知者。謂等木石太虛無情之流。靈鑒幽燭(照)形(顯)于未兆。道無隱機(微事)寧曰無知 初句詰前。但今談者。夫智下四句對妄顯真。以示無知。世稱下揀異木石以示有知。靈鑒下正顯智體。形於下示智用。遍知未來
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：聖人對於外物，不執取，也不排斥。不把外物看作實有，因為外物並非真實存在；也不把外物看作虛無，因為外物並非完全不存在。前兩句說明從因緣來看，外物並非實有，所以說『不物』。從因緣生起來看，外物並非虛無，所以說『不非』等。后四句承接前面的話，辨明中道。
因為並非實有，所以不執取；因為並非虛無，所以不捨棄。不捨棄，所以微妙地存在，即是真如；不執取，所以名相之間沒有互相依賴的因緣。名相之間沒有互相依賴的因緣，不是因為有知；微妙地存在，即是真如，不是因為無知。『不取』，是因為名相的本質是空，執取也得不到；『不捨』，是因為實相微妙地存在，無法捨棄。中間四句中，因為不捨棄，所以在事物中顯現真如，湛然無相，所以說『妙存』。因為不執取，所以名相沒有因緣而生起，又名與相互相依賴而生。如果不執著，互相依賴的關係自然消亡。後面四句承接前面，解釋成就雙重否定。『非有知』，是因為所知是空；『非無知』，是因為心微妙地存在。
所以經書上說，般若（prajna，智慧）對於諸法，沒有執取，沒有捨棄，沒有知，沒有不知。這超越了攀緣，遠離了心識的領域，如果還想用有無來詰難，不是太遠了嗎？《放光般若經》第十三品中，文字記載說，般若波羅蜜（prajnaparamita，智慧到彼岸）對於諸法等沒有知，下面又在別的章節。如前面所引用，以五陰（panca-skandha，色、受、想、行、識）、乃至十八不共法（avenika-dharma，佛的十八種不共功德）等，相是空，所以沒有執取。沒有執取，就沒有知。微妙地存在，所以沒有捨棄。沒有捨棄，就沒有不知。『此攀緣下』是論者的言辭，舉出整體而責備，可以知道。
請問那些陳述有無的人，智慧的產生，侷限於現象之內。法（dharma，佛法）的本質是沒有現象的，聖智（arya-jnana，聖者的智慧）怎麼會有知？世俗所說的無知，是指如同木頭石頭、太虛空一樣沒有情感的東西。靈明的智慧能夠幽深地照見，在事物還沒有顯現的時候就能夠顯現出來，道沒有隱藏的玄機，怎麼能說是無知呢？第一句詰問前面。但是現在談論的人，『夫智下』四句針對虛妄而顯真實，以此來顯示無知。『世稱下』揀擇區分木頭石頭，以此來顯示有知。『靈鑒下』正是顯現智慧的本體。『形於下』顯示智慧的作用，普遍地知曉未來。
【English Translation】 English version: The sage does not grasp at things, nor does he reject them. He does not regard things as truly existent, because they are not truly existent; nor does he regard them as non-existent, because they are not entirely non-existent. The first two sentences explain that from the perspective of conditions, things are not truly existent, hence 『not-thing』. From the perspective of conditioned arising, things are not non-existent, hence 『not-not』 and so on. The last four sentences continue from the previous ones, clarifying the Middle Way.
Because it is not truly existent, one does not grasp; because it is not non-existent, one does not abandon. Not abandoning, therefore it subtly exists, which is Suchness; not grasping, therefore names and forms have no mutually dependent causes. Names and forms have no mutually dependent causes, not because of having knowledge; subtly existing, which is Suchness, not because of having no knowledge. 『Not grasping』 is because the essence of names and forms is emptiness, and grasping cannot attain it; 『not abandoning』 is because the true nature subtly exists, and cannot be abandoned. In the middle four sentences, because of not abandoning, true nature manifests in things, serenely without form, hence 『subtly exists』. Because of not grasping, names and forms arise without causes, and names and forms arise mutually dependent. If one does not cling, the mutually dependent relationship naturally disappears. The last four sentences continue from the previous ones, explaining the accomplishment of double negation. 『Not having knowledge』 is because what is known is empty; 『not having no knowledge』 is because the mind subtly exists.
Therefore, the scriptures say, prajna (prajna, wisdom) towards all dharmas (dharma, teachings) has no grasping, no abandoning, no knowledge, no non-knowledge. This transcends clinging and is far from the realm of consciousness. If one still wants to question with existence and non-existence, isn't that too far off? In the thirteenth chapter of the Fangguang Prajna Sutra, the text states that prajnaparamita (prajnaparamita, perfection of wisdom) towards all dharmas and so on has no knowledge, and further details are in other chapters. As quoted earlier, with the five skandhas (panca-skandha, form, feeling, perception, volition, consciousness), and even the eighteen avenika-dharmas (avenika-dharma, eighteen unique qualities of a Buddha), their characteristics are empty, so there is no grasping. Without grasping, there is no knowledge. Subtly existing, so there is no abandoning. Without abandoning, there is no non-knowledge. 『This clinging below』 is the words of the commentator, raising the whole to blame, which can be known.
May I ask those who assert existence and non-existence, the arising of wisdom is limited within phenomena. The essence of dharma (dharma, teachings) has no phenomena, how can arya-jnana (arya-jnana, noble wisdom) have knowledge? What the world calls no knowledge refers to things like wood, stone, and the void, which have no emotions. The luminous wisdom can deeply illuminate, manifesting before things have manifested, the Way has no hidden secrets, how can it be said to have no knowledge? The first sentence questions the previous. But those who are discussing now, the four sentences from 『the wisdom below』 are directed at the false to reveal the true, to show no knowledge. 『What the world calls below』 selects and distinguishes wood and stone, to show having knowledge. 『The luminous reflection below』 is precisely revealing the essence of wisdom. 『The form below』 shows the function of wisdom, universally knowing the future.
故曰未兆。悉覺現在故無隱機。現未既然。過去應爾。華嚴云。智入三世悉皆平等。寧曰無知者。四無所畏徴之而汗竟弗生。十力所能照之而事無不契。達僧祇之數量。塵墨難名。窮法界之泉源。太虛何限。遍知若此。豈曰無知耶。
且無知生(因起)于無知。無無知也無有知也 字誤。應云無知生於有知。謂無知亦相待而起。第一義中二名俱無。
無有知也。謂之非有。無無知也謂之非無。所以虛不失照。照不失虛。怕然永寂靡(無)執靡拘。孰(誰)能動之令有。靜之使無邪 初四句可知。所以下二句。承前釋成權實雙現。次一句雙亡。后一句離著。能所兩亡無執也。有無雙非不拘也。孰能下結責。謂動靜二智非異。有知無知何殊。
故經云。真般若者非有非無無起無滅。不可說示於人 證成前義。
何則(徴)言其非有者。言其非是有。非謂是非有。言其非無者。言其非是無。非謂是非無。非有非非有。非無非非無 且徴經中非有非無而釋之。初句牒經。據起信論釋皆遮過之義。因執般若是有故。言非有。反執云。是非有下復破云。非謂是非有無亦例然。后二句重遮。由聞前說不住有無。卻住于非有非無。故今遣云。非非有拂卻非有。非非無拂卻非無。雖曰不有不無。豈住于不有不無
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 所以說，在事情發生之前是『未兆』的狀態。完全覺知現在發生的事情，所以沒有隱藏的機巧。現在和未來既然如此，過去也應該是這樣。正如《華嚴經》所說：『智慧進入過去、現在、未來三世，一切都是平等的。』怎麼能說佛沒有智慧呢？用四無所畏（指佛的四種無所畏懼的自信）來質問，也無法使佛感到畏懼；用十力（指佛的十種力量）來照亮，沒有事情不符合真理。佛能通達僧祇（無數）的數量，用塵埃和墨水都難以計數；窮盡法界的泉源，廣大如虛空沒有邊際。佛的遍知就像這樣，怎麼能說佛沒有智慧呢？ 而且，『無知』（Avidya，指無明）生起于『有知』（Vidya，指智慧），並非真的沒有『無知』，也並非真的沒有『有知』。這裡文字有誤，應該說『無知生於有知』，意思是說『無知』也是相對『有知』而產生的。在第一義諦（Paramartha，指最高的真理）中，『有知』和『無知』這兩個名稱都不存在。 『無有知』，指的是『非有』；『無無知』，指的是『非無』。所以，虛空不會失去照亮萬物的能力，照亮萬物的能力也不會失去虛空的本質。坦然寂靜，沒有執著，沒有拘束。誰能使它從無到有，又使它從有到無呢？前面四句容易理解。『所以』以下兩句，承接前面解釋成就權智和實智雙重顯現。下一句是雙重泯滅。最後一句是遠離執著。能和所都消失了，就是沒有執著。『有』和『無』都否定了，就是沒有拘束。『誰能』以下是總結責問，意思是說動智和靜智並非不同，『有知』和『無知』又有什麼區別呢？ 所以經中說：『真正的般若（Prajna，指智慧）既非有也非無，無生也無滅，無法用語言向人展示。』這是爲了證明前面的意義。 為什麼這樣說呢？說它是『非有』，是說它不是『是有』；並不是說它『不是有』。說它是『非無』，是說它不是『是無』；並不是說它『不是無』。既非『有』也非『非有』，既非『無』也非『非無』。這裡姑且引用經中的『非有非無』來解釋它。第一句引用經文。根據《起信論》的解釋，這都是爲了遮止過失的意義。因為執著般若是『有』，所以說『非有』。如果反而執著說『是非有』，那麼下面就再次破斥說『非謂是非有』，『無』的情況也是一樣。後面兩句是雙重遮止。因為聽到前面所說的不執著于『有』和『無』，卻執著于『非有非無』，所以現在遣除說『非非有』，拂去『非有』；『非非無』，拂去『非無』。雖然說『不有不無』，難道要執著于『不有不無』嗎？
【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, it is said to be 『unmanifested』 (未兆, literally 'not yet manifested'). Fully aware of the present, there are no hidden mechanisms. Since the present and future are like this, the past should be as well. As the Avatamsaka Sutra (華嚴經) says, 『Wisdom enters the three times (past, present, and future) and all are equal.』 How can it be said that the Buddha is without knowledge? Questioning with the Four Fearlessnesses (四無所畏, four kinds of fearlessness of a Buddha) will not cause the Buddha to feel fear; illuminating with the Ten Powers (十力, ten powers of a Buddha) will ensure that everything aligns with the truth. The Buddha can comprehend the number of asamkhyas (僧祇, countless), which are difficult to count even with dust and ink; exhaust the source of the Dharmadhatu (法界, realm of Dharma), which is as vast as limitless space. The Buddha's omniscience is like this, how can it be said that the Buddha is without knowledge? Moreover, 『ignorance』 (Avidya, 無知) arises from 『knowledge』 (Vidya, 有知); it is not that there is truly no 『ignorance,』 nor is it that there is truly no 『knowledge.』 There is a textual error here; it should say 『ignorance arises from knowledge,』 meaning that 『ignorance』 is also produced relative to 『knowledge.』 In the ultimate truth (Paramartha, 第一義諦), the two names 『knowledge』 and 『ignorance』 do not exist. 『Without knowledge』 refers to 『non-being』; 『without non-knowledge』 refers to 『non-non-being.』 Therefore, emptiness does not lose its ability to illuminate all things, and the ability to illuminate all things does not lose the essence of emptiness. Be at ease and eternally silent, without attachment, without constraint. Who can make it from non-being to being, and from being to non-being? The first four sentences are easy to understand. The two sentences following 『therefore』 explain the dual manifestation of expedient wisdom and ultimate wisdom. The next sentence is a dual annihilation. The last sentence is about being free from attachment. When both the subject and object disappear, there is no attachment. When both 『being』 and 『non-being』 are negated, there is no constraint. The part following 『who can』 is a concluding question, meaning that moving wisdom and still wisdom are not different, so what is the difference between 『knowledge』 and 『ignorance』? Therefore, the sutra says, 『True Prajna (般若, wisdom) is neither being nor non-being, neither arising nor ceasing, and cannot be shown to people with words.』 This is to prove the previous meaning. Why is this so? Saying it is 『non-being』 is saying it is not 『being』; it is not saying that it 『is not being.』 Saying it is 『non-non-being』 is saying it is not 『non-being』; it is not saying that it 『is not non-being.』 It is neither 『being』 nor 『non-being,』 neither 『non-being』 nor 『non-non-being.』 Here, let us quote the 『neither being nor non-being』 from the sutra to explain it. The first sentence quotes the sutra. According to the explanation in the Awakening of Faith (起信論), this is all to prevent the meaning of faults. Because one is attached to Prajna as 『being,』 it is said to be 『non-being.』 If one instead clings to saying 『is not being,』 then the following refutes it again by saying 『it is not that it is not being,』 and the situation with 『non-being』 is the same. The last two sentences are double negations. Because one hears the previous saying of not being attached to 『being』 and 『non-being,』 but clings to 『non-being and non-non-being,』 therefore now it is dismissed by saying 『not non-being,』 brushing away 『non-being』; 『not non-non-being,』 brushing away 『non-non-being.』 Although it is said 『neither being nor non-being,』 should one cling to 『neither being nor non-being』?
哉。
是以須菩提終日說般若。而云無所說。此絕言之道。知何以傳。庶(希望也)參玄君子有以會之耳 放光無住品略云。須菩提語諸天子言。我所說者常不見一字。教亦無聽者等。此絕下本離言說。亦無相想。以知求智何以傳。通遣言象也。君子者。指遺民依斯通釋有可領會。以前云當有深證等。故此結之。
又云。宜先定聖心。所以應會之道。為當唯照無相耶。為當咸睹其變耶 據前難。先難睹變之知。謂有所取。然後云宜先定聖心。此難通有二意。一難有取。二難心異。今答中先答心異。躡此後答不取。文義相順故也。
談者似謂無相與變其旨不一。睹變則異乎無相。照無相則失於撫會 就敘遺民求心有異。
然則即真之義或有滯也 即真等者。即俗而真之義。或似滯而未通。
經云。色不異空空不異色。色即是空空即是色 大品第二也。彼云。非色異空。等有執色處非空空處非色。故經云。色不異空等有。執析色方空空不在色。故經云。色即是空等。寶性論說。初心菩薩于空未了。有三種疑(云云)。今以色空相即二諦相融。先辨境通。后示心一。
若如來旨(意)觀色空時。應一心見色一心見空 設爾何失。
若一心見色則唯色非空。若一心見空則唯空非色
【現代漢語翻譯】 哉。
是以須菩提（Subhuti，佛陀的十大弟子之一，解空第一）終日說般若（Prajna，智慧），而云無所說。此絕言之道，知何以傳？庶（希望也）參玄君子有以會之耳。放光無住品略云：『須菩提語諸天子言，我所說者常不見一字，教亦無聽者等。』此絕下本離言說，亦無相想，以知求智何以傳？通遣言象也。君子者，指遺民依斯通釋有可領會。以前云當有深證等，故此結之。
又云：『宜先定聖心，所以應會之道，為當唯照無相耶？為當咸睹其變耶？』據前難，先難睹變之知，謂有所取。然後云宜先定聖心，此難通有二意：一難有取，二難心異。今答中先答心異，躡此後答不取，文義相順故也。
談者似謂無相與變其旨不一，睹變則異乎無相，照無相則失於撫會。就敘遺民求心有異。
然則即真之義或有滯也。即真等者，即俗而真之義，或似滯而未通。
經云：『色不異空，空不異色。色即是空，空即是色。』大品第二也。彼云：『非色異空。』等有執色處非空，空處非色。故經云：『色不異空』等有執析色方空，空不在色。故經云：『色即是空』等。寶性論說，初心菩薩于空未了，有三種疑（云云）。今以色空相即二諦相融，先辨境通，后示心一。
若如來旨（意），觀色空時，應一心見色，一心見空？設爾何失？
若一心見色則唯色非空，若一心見空則唯空非色。
【English Translation】 哉。
Therefore, Subhuti (Subhuti, one of the Buddha's ten great disciples, foremost in understanding emptiness) speaks of Prajna (Prajna, wisdom) all day long, yet says he has said nothing. This is the path beyond words; how can it be transmitted? Hopefully, those gentlemen who delve into the profound (庶) will be able to comprehend it. The 'Effulgent and Non-Abiding' chapter briefly states: 'Subhuti said to the gods, 'What I speak of, I never see a single word, and there are no listeners to the teachings.' This completely transcends the foundation of words and speech, and there are no conceptualizations. How can wisdom be transmitted through knowledge-seeking? It universally dismisses words and symbols. 'Gentlemen' refers to those who, relying on this comprehensive explanation, can grasp its meaning. As it was previously stated that there should be profound realization, this concludes it.
It is also said: 'It is appropriate to first settle the sacred mind. Therefore, regarding the path of appropriate understanding, should one only illuminate the absence of form? Or should one fully perceive its transformations?' Based on the previous difficulty, the difficulty lies first in the knowledge of perceiving transformations, which implies something is being grasped. Then it is said that it is appropriate to first settle the sacred mind. This difficulty encompasses two meanings: first, the difficulty of grasping; second, the difficulty of differing minds. In the current response, the differing minds are addressed first, followed by the response to non-grasping, so the meaning of the text is consistent.
The debaters seem to think that the essence of 'no-form' and 'transformation' are not the same. Perceiving transformation is different from 'no-form,' and illuminating 'no-form' loses the ability to connect and understand. This describes the differences in how the remaining people seek the mind.
In that case, the meaning of 'identity with truth' may be obstructed. 'Identity with truth' refers to the meaning of being true while being in the mundane, which may seem obstructed and not fully understood.
The sutra says: 'Form is not different from emptiness, emptiness is not different from form. Form is exactly emptiness, emptiness is exactly form.' This is from the second chapter of the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra. It says: 'Form is not different from emptiness.' There are those who cling to form, believing that where there is form, there is no emptiness, and where there is emptiness, there is no form. Therefore, the sutra says: 'Form is not different from emptiness,' because there are those who cling to analyzing form as being separate from emptiness, and emptiness not being in form. Therefore, the sutra says: 'Form is exactly emptiness.' The Ratnagotravibhāga states that novice Bodhisattvas have three doubts regarding emptiness (etc.). Now, by showing that form and emptiness are identical and the two truths are in harmony, we first clarify the understanding of the realm, and then show the oneness of mind.
If, according to the Tathagata's (如來，Tathagata, meaning 'Thus Gone One', an epithet of the Buddha) intention, when observing form and emptiness, should one see form with one mind and see emptiness with one mind? What would be the fault in that?
If one sees form with one mind, then there is only form and no emptiness. If one sees emptiness with one mind, then there is only emptiness and no form.
。然則空色兩(殊)陳。莫定其本也 前四句各一句縱前。各一句奪而出過。若唯色非空。何故經云。色不異空色即是空。唯空例同然則下正明其違。本謂經也。亦本旨也。若空色殊觀。豈不違經空色相即之旨。二而不二文乎。
是以經云非色者。誠以非(破斥之辭)色於色。不非色于非色(空) 牒經以釋色即是空。故牒非色。初出正理。謂凡夫執青黃等相。皆謂實有者。不了從緣性空之理。故經破著。即于青黃色中。求色無實如幻如夢。故云非色於色。
若非色于非色。太虛則非色。非色何所明 此釋前不非色于非色也。本就所執。色中非斥如幻。以顯真空。故云非色。若非色于太虛。太虛本非色何用更非。則非色名義自不成立。
若以非色於色。即非色不異色。非色不異色。色即為非色 前二句色空不異。后二句顯空色相即。成前經意。
故知變即無相無相即變。群情不同故教跡有異耳。考之玄籍本之聖意。豈復真偽殊心。空有異照耶 承上經意。以所照空有二而不二。答能照之心二智一體。群情下亦會違。何故亦有說云真俗迢然二智各照也。釋云。由群情(云云)玄籍者。指前所引之經。真偽是心空有是境。偽目權智。
是以照無相不失撫會之功(初句)睹變動不乖無相之旨
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 然而，空和色兩者（確實）是分別陳述的，無法確定它們的根本性質。前面的四句，每一句都先肯定，然後又用一句來否定，從而超越過去。如果只有色而沒有空，為什麼經書上說：『色不異空，色即是空』？只有空的情況也類似。那麼『然則』以下，正是爲了說明這種違背。『本』指的是經書，也是根本宗旨。如果把空和色看作是截然不同的，豈不是違背了經書中空色相即，二而不二的宗旨？
因此，經書上說『非色』，實在是因為在色中否定色，而不是在非色（空）中否定色。引用經文來解釋『色即是空』，所以引用『非色』。首先提出正理，說凡夫執著于青黃等相，都認為是真實存在的，不瞭解從緣而生、性本空的道理。所以經書破除這種執著，就在青黃色中，尋求色的無實，如幻如夢，所以說『非色於色』。
如果是在非色中否定色，那麼太虛本身就是非色，又何必再否定非色呢？那麼『非色』這個名義本身就不成立了。
如果用『非色』來否定色，那麼『非色』就與色沒有區別，『非色』就與（此處應為「空」，原文有誤）沒有區別，就是『非色』。前面的兩句說的是色空不異，後面的兩句顯示的是空色相即，成就了前面的經文的含義。
所以要知道，變動就是無相，無相就是變動。因為眾生的理解不同，所以佛陀的教法和示現的途徑才有所不同。考察玄妙的經典，以聖人的意旨為根本，難道還會有真偽之心的差別，空有之境的不同的照見嗎？承接上面的經文含義，用所照的空有二而不二，來回答能照的心是二智一體。『群情』以下，也是爲了調和違背之處，為什麼也有人說真諦和俗諦截然不同，兩種智慧各自照見呢？解釋說，由於眾生的理解（云云）。『玄籍』指的是前面所引用的經文。真偽是心，空有是境。偽指的是權巧的智慧。
因此，照見無相，不會失去撫慰和會合的功用（第一句）；看到變動，不會違背無相的宗旨。
【English Translation】 English version: However, emptiness (kong) and form (se) are (indeed) stated separately, and their fundamental nature cannot be determined. The previous four sentences each first affirm and then negate with another sentence, thus transcending the past. If there were only form and no emptiness, why do the scriptures say: 'Form does not differ from emptiness; form is precisely emptiness'? The case of emptiness alone is similar. Then, what follows after 'however' precisely clarifies this contradiction. 'Fundamental' refers to the scriptures, and also the fundamental principle. If emptiness and form are viewed as completely different, wouldn't that contradict the scripture's principle of the mutual identity of emptiness and form, the principle of being two but not two?
Therefore, the scriptures say 'non-form' (fei se), truly because it negates form within form, not negating form within non-form (emptiness). Quoting the scripture to explain 'form is precisely emptiness,' hence quoting 'non-form.' First, it presents the correct principle, saying that ordinary people cling to the appearances of blue, yellow, etc., all believing them to be real, not understanding the principle of arising from conditions and the emptiness of nature. Therefore, the scriptures break this attachment, seeking the unreality of form, like illusion and dream, within the blue and yellow colors, hence saying 'non-form in form.'
If form is negated in non-form, then the Great Void (taixu) itself is non-form, so why further negate non-form? Then the name and meaning of 'non-form' itself would not be established.
If 'non-form' is used to negate form, then 'non-form' is no different from form, and 'non-form' is no different from * (should be 'emptiness' (kong) here, original text is wrong), * is 'non-form.' The previous two sentences say that form and emptiness are not different, and the latter two sentences show that emptiness and form are mutually identical, fulfilling the meaning of the previous scripture.
Therefore, one should know that change is precisely no-appearance (wu xiang), and no-appearance is precisely change. Because the understanding of sentient beings is different, the Buddha's teachings and manifested paths are different. Examining the profound scriptures, taking the sage's intention as the foundation, could there still be differences in the mind of truth and falsehood, different perceptions of the realms of emptiness and existence? Continuing the meaning of the above scripture, using the emptiness and existence that are illuminated as two but not two, to answer that the illuminating mind is the unity of two wisdoms. What follows 'sentient beings' is also to reconcile contradictions. Why do some also say that the true and conventional are completely different, and the two wisdoms illuminate separately? It is explained that, due to the understanding of sentient beings (etc.). 'Profound scriptures' refers to the scriptures quoted earlier. Truth and falsehood are the mind, emptiness and existence are the realm. Falsehood refers to expedient wisdom.
Therefore, illuminating no-appearance does not lose the function of comforting and uniting (first sentence); seeing change does not violate the principle of no-appearance.
(二句)造有不異無造無不異有(三句)未嘗不有未嘗不無(四句) 依心照境。四句料簡皆顯非異。初句無相即相智照之時。實而恒權二句。變動即靜故權而恒實。三句有不異無非有也。無不異有非無也。以境非有無心造之時理量雙絕。四句中亦承前起。雖非有非無。不妨亦有亦無。若心若境遮表四具。遮亦非異表亦無殊。此中照及撫會睹造等言屬心。無相變動及三中有無系境。四中有無通心。文理昭然。不敢狂簡。
故曰。不動等覺。而建立諸法 即真成俗也以此而推寂用何妨。如之何謂睹變之知異無相之照乎 初二句承前以明心一。如之何下責異。
恐談者脫謂空有兩心靜躁殊用。故言睹變之知不可謂之不有耳 承前無異以答不取。故復標談者。此但先出問意。然後答之。差謂以權實不一之心。觀空有兩殊之境。謂言靜智無知動智睹變。豈無知取乎。脫亦忽也。
若能捨己心於封內。尋玄機於事外齊萬有於一虛。曉至虛之非無者。當言至人終日應會與物推移乘運(時)撫化。未始為有也 玄機者。真智也。初句令舍情執封滯無懷前識以標玄存所存之必當。事外者。令無即言定旨尋大方而徴隅。齊萬下謂觀緣萬殊性空齊。一非有也。至虛只在緣中非無也。當言下承前以明不取。夫能如是忘情了
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： （二句）認為『有』並不異於『無造』，認為『無』並不異於『有』。（三句）未曾不是『有』，未曾不是『無』。（四句）依心而照境。四句料簡都顯示了『非異』。第一句『無相』即是『相智』照耀之時。『實而恒權』二句，變動即是靜止，所以『權』而恒『實』。第三句，『有不異無』並非真『有』，『無不異有』並非真『無』。因為境並非『有』『無』，心造之時，道理和數量都超越了。第四句中也承接前面所說，雖然非『有』非『無』，不妨礙亦『有』亦『無』。若心若境，遮和表四者都具備。遮也並非『異』，表也沒有什麼不同。這裡『照』以及『撫會』、『睹造』等詞語屬於心，『無相』、『變動』以及三句中的『有無』關聯於境，四句中的『有無』貫通心。文理非常明顯，不敢隨意簡化。
所以說：『不動等覺（指如如不動的覺性），而建立諸法』，即是從真而成俗。由此推論，寂靜之用又有什麼妨礙呢？怎麼能說『睹變』的知見異於『無相』的照見呢？最初兩句承接前面來闡明心是一體的。『如之何』以下是責備『異』。
恐怕談論者會錯誤地認為空和有是兩種心，靜和躁是不同的作用。所以說『睹變』的知見不可說成不是『有』。承接前面的『無異』來回答『不取』，所以又標明『談者』。這只是先提出疑問，然後回答它。錯誤地認為用權實不一的心，觀察空有兩殊的境，認為靜智無知，動智睹變，難道沒有認知嗎？『脫』也是『忽』的意思。
如果能夠將自己的心從封閉的範圍內捨棄，在事物之外尋求玄機（指真智），使萬有在空性中齊一，明白至虛並非『無』的人，應當說至人終日應會與事物推移，乘著時運撫慰教化，未曾是『有』。玄機，就是真智。第一句是讓捨棄情執，封閉滯留，不要懷有前識，以此來標明玄存，所存的必定是應當的。『事外』，是讓不要拘泥於言語，確定宗旨，尋求大道而徵詢角落。『齊萬』以下是說觀察緣起萬殊，性空齊一，『一』並非『有』。至虛只在緣起之中，並非『無』。『當言』以下承接前面來闡明『不取』。能夠這樣忘情了悟。
【English Translation】 English version: (Two lines) To consider 'existence' as not different from 'non-creation', and to consider 'non-existence' as not different from 'creation'. (Three lines) Never not existing, never not non-existing. (Four lines) Relying on the mind to illuminate the realm. The four lines of consideration all reveal 'non-difference'. The first line, 'no-form' (Wuxiang), is the moment when 'form-wisdom' (Xiangzhi) illuminates. The two lines 'real and constantly expedient' (Shi er heng quan), change is stillness, therefore 'expedient' (Quan) is constantly 'real' (Shi). The third line, 'existence not different from non-existence' is not true 'existence', 'non-existence not different from existence' is not true 'non-existence'. Because the realm is neither 'existence' nor 'non-existence', at the time of mental creation, reason and quantity are both transcended. The fourth line also follows from what was said before, although it is neither 'existence' nor 'non-existence', it does not prevent it from being both 'existence' and 'non-existence'. Whether mind or realm, concealment and manifestation are all complete. Concealment is not 'different', and manifestation is not distinct. Here, words such as 'illuminate' (Zhao), 'soothe and meet' (Fu hui), and 'behold creation' (Du zao) belong to the mind. 'No-form' (Wuxiang), 'change' (Biandong), and the 'existence and non-existence' in the third line are related to the realm. The 'existence and non-existence' in the fourth line permeates the mind. The meaning is very clear, and I dare not simplify it recklessly.
Therefore, it is said: 'Immovable equal-awareness' (Budong dengjue) [referring to the unmoving awareness of Suchness], 'establishes all dharmas', which is transforming from truth into convention. From this, what harm is there in the function of stillness? How can it be said that the knowledge of 'beholding change' (Du bian) is different from the illumination of 'no-form' (Wuxiang)? The first two lines follow from the previous to clarify that the mind is one. 'How can it be said' (Ru zhi he) below is to rebuke 'difference'.
Fearing that those who discuss it might mistakenly think that emptiness and existence are two minds, and stillness and agitation are different functions, it is said that the knowledge of 'beholding change' (Du bian) cannot be said to be not 'existence'. Following the previous 'non-difference' to answer 'not taking', therefore 'those who discuss it' (Tan zhe) is marked again. This is only to first raise the question, and then answer it. Mistakenly thinking that with a mind that is not uniform in expediency and reality, observing the two different realms of emptiness and existence, thinking that still wisdom is without knowledge, and moving wisdom beholds change, is there no cognition? 'Escape' (Tuo) also means 'suddenly' (Hu).
If one can relinquish one's own mind from within its confines, seek the profound mechanism (Xuanji) [referring to true wisdom] outside of affairs, equalize all existence in one emptiness, and understand that ultimate emptiness is not 'non-existence', then it should be said that the perfect person responds and meets with things all day long, moving with the times to soothe and transform, never being 'existence'. Profound mechanism (Xuanji) is true wisdom. The first sentence is to relinquish emotional attachments, confinement and stagnation, and not to harbor previous knowledge, in order to mark the profound existence, what is stored must be what is appropriate. 'Outside of affairs' (Shi wai), is to not be bound by words, to determine the purpose, to seek the great path and inquire into the corners. 'Equalize all' (Qi wan) below is to say to observe the myriad differences of dependent origination, the emptiness of nature is equal, 'one' is not 'existence'. Ultimate emptiness is only within dependent origination, not 'non-existence'. 'It should be said' (Dang yan) below follows from the previous to clarify 'not taking'. To be able to forget emotions and understand in this way.
境。始可與言心也。已推移者。瑤師云。進退也。權多方推移何定。以萬有故撫化。由一虛故無為。
聖心若此。何有可取。而曰未釋不取之理耶 為即不為。何有知取之情。
又云。無是乃所以為真是。無當乃所以為至當。亦可如來言耳。
若能無心於為是。而是于無是。無心於為當。而當於無當者。則終日是不乖于無是。終日當不乖于無當 此但遣情不遮是當。於是于當茍能忘心。則終日是當不乖于無是無當也。我令於是于當忘心離著。誰斥非是非當。
但恐有是于無是。有當于無當。所以為患耳 心有住於是當。亦惑取之患。
何者(徴)若真是可是。至當可當 有所著也。下彰其過患云。
則名相已形(起)美惡是生。生生奔競。孰與止之 名相一起好惡從生。煩惱紛然諸業隨造。奔走四生競馳五趣。從生至生誰能止息。
是以聖人空洞其懷。無識無知。然居動用之域。而止無為之境。處有名之內。而宅(居)絕言之鄉。寂寥虛曠莫可以形名。得若斯而已矣 初二句總顯聖心。非有了別故云無識。亦非知覺故云無知。次二句相即無相。次二句名即無名。非名曰寂非相曰寥。虛曠下成前空洞耳。
乃曰真是可是至當可當。未喻(曉)雅旨也。恐是當之生物謂
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：達到這種境界，才可以和他談論心。已經推移變化的事物，瑤師說，是進退變化。權衡多方推移不定，因為萬有而撫慰教化，因為一虛而無所作為。 聖人的心境如果這樣，還有什麼可以執取的？卻說沒有解釋不執取的道理嗎？因為即是不為，哪裡有知道執取的情感？ 又說，沒有『是』，才是真正的『是』；沒有『當』，才是最恰當的『當』。也可以說是如來的言語。 如果能夠無心於認為是，而是無是；無心於認為是當，而是無當，那麼終日是也不違背無是，終日當也不違背無當。這只是遣除情執，不遮蔽是當。對於是和當，如果能夠忘記心，那麼終日是當也不違背無是無當。我使你對於是和當忘記心，遠離執著，誰會斥責你不是是，不是當呢？ 只是擔心有是于無是，有當于無當，所以才成為禍患啊！心中有所住於是當，也是迷惑于執取的禍患。 （徴）如果真是可是，至當可當，那就是有所執著了。下面彰顯它的過患說： （起）那麼名相已經形成，美惡就產生了。生生世世奔波競爭，誰能停止它呢？名相一旦產生，好惡就隨之而生。煩惱紛紛擾擾，各種業隨之造作。奔走於四生（四種生命形式：胎生、卵生、濕生、化生），競逐於五趣（地獄、餓鬼、畜生、人、天）。從生到生，誰能停止呢？ 因此，聖人空明虛懷，沒有分別意識，沒有主觀知覺。然而身處變動不居的世間，卻安住于無為的境界；處於有名有相的世界之內，卻居於言語斷絕的處所。寂靜空曠，沒有什麼可以用來形容，達到這樣而已。初二句總括地顯示聖人的心境。不是有了別，所以說沒有分別意識；也不是知覺，所以說沒有主觀知覺。次二句是相即無相，次二句是名即無名。不是名叫做寂，不是相叫做寥。虛曠以下是成就前面的空洞罷了。 卻說真是可是，至當可當，這是沒有領悟雅正的旨意啊！恐怕是當的產生，是由於...
【English Translation】 English version: Only when one reaches this state can one discuss the mind with him. What has already shifted and changed, Yaoshi (a teacher's name) says, is advancing and retreating. Weighing and shifting in many ways is uncertain, because of the myriad existences, one soothes and transforms; because of one emptiness, one does nothing. If the sage's state of mind is like this, what is there to grasp? Yet it is said that the principle of non-grasping has not been explained? Because 'is' is 'not doing', where is the emotion of knowing grasping? It is also said, 'Without 'is', it is truly 'is'; without 'ought', it is the most appropriate 'ought'.' It can also be said to be the words of the Tathagata (another name for Buddha). If one can be without mind in considering 'is', but 'is' in 'no is'; without mind in considering 'ought', but 'ought' in 'no ought', then all day 'is' does not violate 'no is', all day 'ought' does not violate 'no ought'. This only dispels emotional attachments and does not obscure 'is' and 'ought'. If one can forget the mind in 'is' and 'ought', then all day 'is' and 'ought' do not violate 'no is' and 'no ought'. I cause you to forget the mind and be detached from 'is' and 'ought', who will denounce you for not being 'is' or 'ought'? It is only feared that there is 'is' in 'no is', and 'ought' in 'no ought', which is why it becomes a calamity! If the mind dwells on 'is' and 'ought', it is also deluded by the calamity of grasping. (徴) If truly 'is' is permissible, and supremely 'ought' is permissible, then there is attachment. The following reveals its faults: (起) Then names and forms have already taken shape, and beauty and ugliness are produced. Generation after generation rushes and competes, who can stop it? Once names and forms arise, good and evil follow. Troubles and confusions arise, and various karmas are created accordingly. Running in the four births (four forms of life: womb-born, egg-born, moisture-born, transformation-born), competing in the five realms (hell, hungry ghosts, animals, humans, gods). From birth to birth, who can stop it? Therefore, the sage empties his mind, without discriminating consciousness, without subjective perception. Yet, dwelling in the realm of activity, he abides in the state of non-action; being within the world of names and forms, he dwells in the realm of the cessation of speech. Silent and vast, nothing can be used to describe it, reaching this is all. The first two sentences generally reveal the sage's state of mind. It is not having discrimination, therefore it is said to be without discriminating consciousness; it is also not perception, therefore it is said to be without subjective perception. The next two sentences are that form is emptiness, the next two sentences are that name is no name. Not name is called silence, not form is called vastness. Emptiness and vastness below complete the preceding emptiness. Yet it is said that truly 'is' is permissible, and supremely 'ought' is permissible, this is not understanding the elegant meaning! I fear that the production of 'is' and 'ought' is due to...
之然。彼自不然。何足以然耳 是當之心但于名相之物。如是而轉。彼般若之體真至雙絕。何足以真是至當為般若耶。
夫言跡(象)之興異途之所由生也。而言有所不言。跡有所不跡。是以善言言者。求言所不能言。善跡跡者。尋跡所不能跡 此有二義。一遺民依言求理。二論主依言答難。今皆遣之。一令妄言會旨。二顯言即無言。初二句雙明過患所由由於言象。異途謂異執宗途也。而言下二句有二義。一言象本空故。二聖心本絕故。是以下承前正示。文甚隱奧。具云善言言者。當言言所不能言之言。謂理非言到。故云言所不能言。寄言顯理故云當言。如經云無說無示。豈不說耶。又云。文字性離。豈取言耶。以遣言之言談離言之理。方為言所不能言之言爾。跡可例說。
至理虛玄擬心已差。況乃有言。恐所示轉遠。庶通心君子。有以相期于文外耳 擬心下謂一念起時已落分別。況依分別而興言象。豈非轉遠余文可解。然遺民師承社主。遍友群賢。豈實執異。但嘉雅論精巧深無不至。假問請談發揚其妙。不可執跡以輕君子。
肇論新疏卷中(畢) 大正藏第 45 冊 No. 1860 肇論新疏
肇論新疏卷下
五臺大萬聖佑國寺開山住持釋源大白馬寺宗主贈邽國公海印開法
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 之然（這樣）。如果它自己不是這樣的，又怎麼能使其他事物變成這樣呢？這種『是』和『當』的觀念，只是在名相之物上如此運轉。而般若（prajna，智慧）的本體，真實到了雙重超越的境界，又怎麼能用『真』和『至當』來作為般若呢？ 言語和表象的產生，是由於不同的途徑所導致的。然而，言語有不能言說之處，表象有不能表象之處。因此，善於運用言語的人，會尋求言語所不能言說的；善於運用表象的人，會尋找表象所不能表象的。這裡有兩層含義：一是遺民（指提問者）依賴言語來尋求真理，二是論主（指肇法師）依賴言語來回答疑問。現在都將它們捨棄。一是使妄言符合旨意，二是顯示言語即是無言。最初兩句，同時說明過失的產生是由於言語和表象。『異途』指的是不同的執著宗派。而『而言』以下的句子有兩層含義：一是言語和表象的本質是空性的，二是聖人的心境本來就是超越的。因此，下面承接前面，正面地揭示。文句非常隱晦深奧。完整地說，善於運用言語的人，應當言說言語所不能言說的言語。意思是真理不是言語所能達到的，所以說『言所不能言』。借用言語來顯明真理，所以說『當言』。如同經文所說『無說無示』，難道是不說嗎？又說，『文字性離』，難道是取用言語嗎？用捨棄言語的言語，來談論脫離言語的真理，才算是言語所不能言說的言語。表象可以類比說明。 至高的真理虛無玄妙，稍微動念思量就已經偏離了。更何況是用言語來表達呢？恐怕所指示的反而會越來越遠。希望通達心性的君子，能夠在文字之外有所領悟。『擬心』以下是說，一念生起時就已經落入分別。更何況是依賴分別而產生言語和表象，豈不是越來越遠？其餘的文字可以理解。然而，遺民師承社主，遍訪賢人，難道真的執著于不同的觀點嗎？只是讚賞雅正的論述精巧深刻，無所不至，借用提問來引發談論，發揚其中的妙處。不可執著于表面的文字而輕視君子。 《肇論新疏》卷中（完） 《大正藏》第 45 冊 No. 1860 《肇論新疏》 《肇論新疏》卷下 五臺山大萬聖佑國寺開山住持釋源，大白馬寺宗主，贈邽國公海印開法
【English Translation】 English version: So it is. If it is not so of itself, how can it make other things so? This notion of 'is' and 'ought' merely revolves around things of names and forms. But the substance of prajna (wisdom), is truly transcendent to the point of being doubly absolute. How can 'truth' and 'oughtness' be taken as prajna? The arising of words and representations is due to different paths. However, there are things that words cannot express, and representations that cannot represent. Therefore, those who are skilled in using words seek what words cannot express; those who are skilled in using representations seek what representations cannot represent. There are two meanings here: first, the Remnant (referring to the questioner) relies on words to seek truth; second, the author of the treatise (referring to Master Zhao) relies on words to answer questions. Now, both are discarded. One is to make false words accord with the meaning, and the other is to show that words are non-words. The first two sentences simultaneously explain that the arising of faults is due to words and representations. 'Different paths' refers to different clinging sects. And the sentences following 'and words' have two meanings: first, the nature of words and representations is emptiness; second, the state of mind of the sage is originally transcendent. Therefore, what follows is a direct revelation. The sentences are very obscure and profound. To say it completely, those who are skilled in using words should speak the words that words cannot speak. It means that truth cannot be reached by words, so it is said 'words cannot speak'. Borrowing words to reveal the truth, so it is said 'ought to speak'. Just as the sutra says 'no speaking, no showing', does it mean not speaking? It also says, 'the nature of words is detachment', does it mean taking words? Using the words that discard words to talk about the truth that is detached from words is what is meant by the words that words cannot speak. Representations can be explained by analogy. The ultimate truth is empty and mysterious, and even a slight thought deviates from it. How much more so when using words to express it? I fear that what is indicated will become increasingly distant. I hope that gentlemen who understand the nature of the mind can have some understanding beyond the words. 'Thinking' below means that when a thought arises, it has already fallen into discrimination. How much more so when relying on discrimination to produce words and representations, wouldn't it be increasingly distant? The rest of the text can be understood. However, the Remnant inherited the master of the society and visited virtuous people everywhere. Does he really cling to different views? He only appreciates the elegant and correct arguments that are exquisite and profound, and nothing is left out. He uses questions to initiate discussions and promote their subtleties. One should not cling to the superficial words and despise the gentleman. Zhao Lun New Commentary Volume Middle (End) Taisho Tripitaka Volume 45 No. 1860 Zhao Lun New Commentary Zhao Lun New Commentary Volume Lower Shiyuan, the founding abbot of Dawansheng Youguo Temple on Mount Wutai, the head of Baima Temple, posthumously awarded the Duke of Gui State, Haiyin, opened the Dharma.
大師長講沙門文才述
涅槃無名論第四 涅槃唐譯圓寂。謂四德已備曰圓。三障已亡曰寂。即第一義真該通空有佛性是也。故下文中亦敘第一義。意在於此。亦名盡諦。如宗中說。約位則凡夫具而未證。三乘證而未極。佛果道圓證無不盡。克體則因果同源依正平等。在闡提不減。登極喜非增。下論云。天地與我同根萬物與我一體。然約出處。說有四種。一自性。二有餘。三無餘。四無住處。體用混成四而非四。詳下可了。無名者。二意。一約對待謂隨流名生死。返流名涅槃。相待而生。因云涅槃。生死若寂涅槃絕待對。誰名涅槃耶。故經云。生死及涅槃二俱不可得。二就本體。謂名因相起相隨名現。涅槃非相名自何生。下論云。不可以形名得。如本經亦說。涅槃名為強立。所以凈名杜口遍友亡言。只為無名故不說示。雖秦王首唱論主發揮。共稟教源述而不作。
僧肇言。肇聞天得一以清。地得一以寧。君王得一以治天下 表端不稱臣而稱名。方外之高也。後世弗能亦有臣稱。天得下語出老氏。一謂自然之道。三者得一。然後能清寧等。
伏惟。陛下睿(聖)哲(智)欽(敬)明道與神會。妙契環中理無不統(貫)遊刃萬機弘道終日。威被蒼生垂文作則(法)所以域中有四大。而王居一焉 尚書睿哲
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 大師長講解，沙門文才記錄。
《涅槃無名論》第四。《涅槃》，唐代譯為「圓寂」，意為四德（常、樂、我、凈）已經完備稱為「圓」，三種障礙（煩惱障、業障、報障）已經消亡稱為「寂」。這就是第一義諦，普遍包含空與有，也就是佛性。所以下面的文章中也敘述第一義，意圖就在於此。也叫做盡諦。如宗門所說，從位次上說，凡夫具有但未證得，三乘（聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘）證得但未到極處，佛果道圓滿證得無不窮盡。從本體上說，因果同源，依報和正報平等。在斷善根者（闡提）身上不減少，登上極喜地（初地菩薩）也不增加。下面的論中說：『天地與我同根，萬物與我一體。』然而從出處上說，有四種：一、自性涅槃；二、有餘涅槃；三、無餘涅槃；四、無住處涅槃。體和用混合而成，四種卻又不是四種，詳細內容在下文可以瞭解。「無名」有兩個意思：一是就對待而言，順著流轉叫做生死，返回本源叫做涅槃，相互對待而產生，因此稱作涅槃。生死如果寂滅，涅槃也就沒有了對待，誰來命名涅槃呢？所以經中說：『生死和涅槃，二者都不可得。』二是就本體而言，名稱因現象而起，現象隨著名稱而顯現，涅槃不是現象，名稱從哪裡產生呢？下面的論中說：『不可以形體和名稱得到。』如《維摩經》也說，涅槃的名字是勉強安立的。所以維摩詰默然不語，遍友（指遍凈天）沒有言語，只因爲涅槃無名所以無法指示。雖然秦王首先倡導，論主（僧肇）加以發揮，都是共同稟承佛教的教義根源，只是闡述而不創作。
僧肇說：我聽說天得到「一」（指道）而清明，地得到「一」而安寧，君王得到「一」而治理天下。這裡表明僧肇稱呼君王不稱臣而稱名，是方外之士的高潔之處。後世的人不能做到，也有稱臣的。天得到「一」等語出自老子，《道德經》。這個「一」指的是自然之道。天、地、君王三者得到「一」，然後才能清明、安寧等。
我恭敬地認為，陛下您聖明，敬重並明瞭「道」，與神妙的「道」相契合，精妙地契合于「環中」的道理，沒有不統攝貫通的，處理各種政務遊刃有餘，弘揚佛道終日不倦。威德覆蓋天下百姓，垂示文章作為法則。所以天地之間有四大（地、水、火、風），而君王居於其中之一。《尚書》中有「睿哲」一詞。
【English Translation】 English version: Master Elder lectured, Shramana Wencai recorded.
Nirvana Anonymity Treatise, Chapter 4. 'Nirvana', translated as 'Parinirvana' in the Tang Dynasty, means that the four virtues (permanence, bliss, self, purity) are complete, called 'Paripurna' (complete), and the three obstacles (affliction obstacle, karma obstacle, retribution obstacle) have disappeared, called 'Shanti' (peaceful). This is the First Noble Truth, universally encompassing emptiness and existence, which is Buddha-nature. Therefore, the following article also describes the First Noble Truth, with the intention of this. It is also called the Ultimate Truth. As the Zen school says, in terms of position, ordinary people possess it but have not realized it, the Three Vehicles (Shravaka Vehicle, Pratyekabuddha Vehicle, Bodhisattva Vehicle) realize it but have not reached the ultimate, and the Buddha-fruit path is completely realized without exception. In terms of essence, cause and effect share the same origin, and the dependent and proper retributions are equal. It does not decrease in those who have severed their roots of goodness (icchantikas), nor does it increase when ascending to the Land of Extreme Joy (first bhumi bodhisattva). The following treatise says: 'Heaven and earth share the same root with me, and all things are one body with me.' However, in terms of origin, there are four types: 1. Svabhavika Nirvana (Self-nature Nirvana); 2. Sopadhisesa Nirvana (Nirvana with remainder); 3. Nirupadhisesa Nirvana (Nirvana without remainder); 4. Apratisthita Nirvana (Non-abiding Nirvana). Essence and function are mixed together, four types yet not four types, the details can be understood below. 'Anonymity' has two meanings: one is in terms of opposition, following the flow is called samsara (birth and death), returning to the origin is called Nirvana, arising in mutual opposition, hence called Nirvana. If samsara is extinguished, Nirvana will also have no opposition, who will name Nirvana? Therefore, the sutra says: 'Samsara and Nirvana, both are unattainable.' Second, in terms of essence, names arise from phenomena, and phenomena appear with names. Nirvana is not a phenomenon, where do names arise from? The following treatise says: 'It cannot be obtained by form and name.' As the Vimalakirti Sutra also says, the name of Nirvana is forcibly established. Therefore, Vimalakirti remained silent, and Vimalaprabha (referring to Suddhavasa heavens) had no words, only because Nirvana is nameless and therefore cannot be indicated. Although King Qin first advocated it, the treatise master (Sengzhao) elaborated on it, both inheriting the doctrinal source of Buddhism, only elucidating and not creating.
Sengzhao said: I have heard that heaven obtains 'One' (referring to the Tao) and becomes clear, earth obtains 'One' and becomes peaceful, and the king obtains 'One' and governs the world. Here it shows that Sengzhao addresses the king without calling himself a subject, which is the nobility of a person outside the world. Later generations cannot do this, and some call themselves subjects. The words 'Heaven obtains One' etc. come from Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching. This 'One' refers to the natural Tao. Heaven, earth, and the king obtain 'One', and then they can be clear, peaceful, etc.
I respectfully believe that Your Majesty is wise, respects and understands the 'Tao', and is wonderfully in harmony with the principle of 'being in the center of the circle', without failing to encompass and penetrate, handling various political affairs with ease, and tirelessly promoting the Buddhist path all day long. Your Majesty's virtue covers all the people, and Your Majesty's writings serve as laws. Therefore, there are four great elements (earth, water, fire, wind) in the world, and the king resides in one of them. The Book of Documents contains the term 'wise'.
舜德。欽明堯德。以二帝之德美秦王也。道謂至道屬涅槃也。神謂興之神智證會此也。環中者。出莊子。彼齊物篇云。樞始得其環中以應無窮。彼喻世之是非互指。彼此相反如環而無窮。環中之虛則無是非之可寄。以況道也。理無不統。謂眾理悉貫也。威被下嘆武以御難文以經世。謂垂布文教與世為法。四大者。老氏云。天大地大道大。而王亦大等。
涅槃之道蓋是三乘之所歸。方等之淵府。渺漭希夷絕視聽之域。幽致(旨)虛玄。殆非群情之所測 根異有三所歸元一。三乘出界雖殊。然放捨身命。共以大涅槃為究竟之宅。渺漭者。水大之貌。幽致下如叢筠。身子地滿智云智尚非知。況凡淺群情耶。
肇以人微猥蒙國恩。得閑居學肆。在什公門下。十有餘載。雖眾經殊致勝趣非一。然涅槃一義常以聽習為先 十有下。瑤公云。十九見什。三十一亡。雖眾下隨經所詮。宗趣無窮。涅槃之義先所聽習。
但才識暗短雖屢(頻)蒙誨喻。猶懷疑漠漠。為竭(盡)愚不已(止)。亦如似有解。然未經高勝先唱。不敢自決。不幸什公去世咨參無所。以為永慨 漠者。瑤云。不分明也。然未下論主謙云。雖似有解。未曾經于高勝之人先示。不敢自判以為必然。什弘始十一年終。
而陛下聖德不孤。獨與什
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：舜德，欽明堯德：用虞舜和唐堯的德行來讚美秦王。道：指最高的道，歸屬於涅槃。神：指啓發智慧的神智，證悟體會這個道。環中：出自《莊子》。《齊物論》中說：『樞得其環中以應無窮』。那裡用它來比喻世間的『是』與『非』相互指責，彼此相反，像圓環一樣沒有窮盡。處於環中的虛無狀態，就沒有『是』與『非』可以寄託，以此來比況『道』。理無不統：指所有的道理都貫通。威被下：讚歎秦王用武力來抵禦危難，用文教來治理國家，指頒佈文教，為世人樹立法度。四大：老子說：『天大，地大，道大，王也大』等等。
涅槃之道，大概是三乘（聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘）所歸宿的地方，是方等經典（指《大方等經》等）的淵源所在。它渺茫無際，寂靜無聲，超越了視覺和聽覺的範圍，幽深微妙，玄妙至極，大概不是一般人的情感所能測度的。根異有三，所歸元一：三乘出離世間的途徑雖然不同，然而放下身命，都以大涅槃為最終的歸宿。渺漭：是水勢浩大的樣子。幽致下如叢筠：指其幽深微妙如同茂密的竹林一般。身子地滿智云智尚非知：即使是舍利弗、地藏菩薩、文殊菩薩這樣的智慧，尚且不能完全知曉，更何況是凡夫俗子的淺薄情感呢？
我僧肇以自己微薄的才能，有幸蒙受國家的恩德，得以閑居學習，在鳩摩羅什（Kumārajīva）的門下，已經有十多年了。雖然眾多佛經的旨趣各有不同，殊勝之處也不一樣，然而對於涅槃的意義，我常常以聽聞和學習為先。十有下：姚興說，十九歲見到鳩摩羅什，三十一歲去世。雖眾下：隨著經典所詮釋的內容，其宗旨和意趣無窮無盡。涅槃的意義是我首先聽聞和學習的。
但是我的才識闇昧短淺，雖然多次蒙受教誨開導，仍然懷疑不解。爲了竭盡我的愚昧，我不斷地請教。也好像有所理解，但是未經高明的人先作倡導，我不敢自己決斷。不幸的是，鳩摩羅什去世了，我沒有地方可以請教，對此我感到永久的遺憾。漠者：姚興說，是不分明的意思。然未下：論主謙虛地說，雖然好像有所理解，但沒有經過高明的人事先闡明，我不敢自己判斷認為是必然的。鳩摩羅什在弘始十一年去世。
而陛下（指秦王）的聖明德行不是孤立的，唯獨與鳩摩羅什
【English Translation】 English version: Shunde, Qinming Yaode: Praising the King of Qin with the virtues of Emperor Shun and Emperor Yao. Dao: Refers to the supreme Dao, belonging to Nirvana. Shen: Refers to the divine wisdom that inspires intelligence, realizing and comprehending this Dao. Huanzhong: Comes from 'Zhuangzi'. In the 'Qi Wu Lun' chapter, it says: 'The pivot obtains its Huanzhong to respond to infinity.' There, it is used to metaphorize the world's 'right' and 'wrong' mutually accusing each other, opposite to each other, like a ring without end. Being in the void of Huanzhong, there is no 'right' and 'wrong' to be entrusted, using this to compare the 'Dao'. Li Wu Bu Tong: Refers to all principles being interconnected. Wei Bei Xia: Praising the King of Qin for using military force to defend against difficulties, and using culture to govern the country, referring to promulgating culture and establishing laws for the world. Si Da: Laozi said: 'Heaven is great, Earth is great, Dao is great, and the King is also great,' etc.
The path of Nirvana is probably the place where the Three Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna, Bodhisattvayāna) return, and the source of the Vaipulya Sutras (referring to the Mahāvaipulya Sūtra, etc.). It is vast and boundless, silent and soundless, beyond the scope of sight and hearing, profound and subtle, extremely mysterious, probably not something that ordinary people's emotions can fathom. Gen Yi You San, Suo Gui Yuan Yi: Although the paths of the Three Vehicles leaving the world are different, they all let go of their lives and take Great Nirvana as their ultimate home. Miao Mang: Is the appearance of vast water. You Zhi Xia Ru Cong Yun: Refers to its profound subtlety being like dense bamboo forests. Shen Zi Di Man Zhi Yun Zhi Shang Fei Zhi: Even the wisdom of Śāriputra, Kṣitigarbha Bodhisattva, and Mañjuśrī Bodhisattva cannot fully know it, let alone the shallow emotions of ordinary people?
I, Sengzhao, with my meager talent, am fortunate to receive the grace of the country, to be able to live in leisure and study, under the tutelage of Kumārajīva for more than ten years. Although the purposes of many Buddhist scriptures are different, and the superior points are also different, I often prioritize hearing and learning about the meaning of Nirvana. Shi You Xia: Yao Xing said, he saw Kumārajīva at the age of nineteen and passed away at the age of thirty-one. Sui Zhong Xia: Following the content explained by the scriptures, its purpose and meaning are endless. The meaning of Nirvana is what I first heard and learned.
However, my talent and knowledge are dim and short, and although I have repeatedly received teachings and guidance, I still have doubts and do not understand. In order to exhaust my ignorance, I constantly ask for advice. It also seems that I have some understanding, but without the advocacy of a high-minded person, I dare not make my own decision. Unfortunately, Kumārajīva passed away, and I have nowhere to ask for advice, for which I feel permanent regret. Mo Zhe: Yao Xing said, it means unclear. Ran Wei Xia: The author humbly said, although it seems that I have some understanding, but without the prior explanation of a high-minded person, I dare not judge it as certain. Kumārajīva passed away in the eleventh year of Hongshi.
And Your Majesty's (referring to the King of Qin) sage virtue is not isolated, only with Kumārajīva
公神契。目擊道存。快盡其中方寸。故能振(舉)彼玄風以啟末俗 論語云。德不孤必有鄰。由秦建德。感什而來。同聲相應妙趣莫逆。故心神符合。目擊下莊子略云。溫伯雪子適齊。仲尼見之兩無一言。子路問之曰。若人者目擊而道存焉。謂目相擊觸已達道意。方寸心也。二人同心。以弘法化開悟末世之俗。風教也。啟開也。
一日遇蒙答安城侯姚嵩書問無為宗極。何者。夫眾生所以久流轉生死者。皆由著欲故也。若欲止於心。則無復生死。既無生死潛神玄默。與虛空合其德。是名涅槃矣。既曰涅槃。復何容有名于其間哉 姚嵩者。亦秦之宗枝。依唐弘明集十八。略云。秦王先有詔云。夫道者以無為為宗。姚嵩難云。不審明道之無為為當以何為體。若以妙為宗者。雖在帝先而非極等。秦王答略云。吾意以謂。道止無為未詳所以宗也。末又云。夫道以無寄為宗。若求寄所在。恐乃惑之大者也。文多不載無為即涅槃也。因依生死推至涅槃故云流轉等。生死果也。必自因招故云著欲故也。若欲下明返生死而復涅槃。無復下躡前以明潛神者。冥潛心神也。玄默者。準寂。默是漠字俱通。玄妙寂默謂涅槃也。虛空舉喻無相略同。故言合德。集中德作體字。既曰下正顯意。謂無為宗極返生死有為。證涅槃無為。無相無名何
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 公神契（指雙方心神契合）。目擊道存（指不用言語，只用眼神就能領會道）。要儘快窮盡其中的心意。所以能夠振興玄妙的佛法，來開啟末世的民俗。《論語》說：『有德之人不會孤單，一定有鄰居。』由於秦王建立德政，感化了什公前來。同聲相應，妙趣相投。所以心神符合，目擊而道存。下面《莊子》略云：溫伯雪子到齊國去，仲尼見了他，兩人沒有說一句話。子路問仲尼：『像這樣的人，只用眼神就能領會道啊。』意思是眼神相接觸就已經領會了道的意旨。方寸指心。二人同心，以弘揚佛法教化，開悟末世的民俗。風指風教。啟指開啟。
有一天，蒙答安城侯姚嵩的信，詢問無為的宗極是什麼。回答說：眾生之所以長久地在生死中流轉，都是由於執著于慾望的緣故。如果慾望止息於心，那麼就不會再有生死。既然沒有生死，心神就潛藏玄默，與虛空合其德性，這就叫做涅槃了。既然叫做涅槃，又怎麼能容許有名字存在於其中呢？姚嵩也是秦朝的宗室。依據《唐弘明集》第十八卷，略云：秦王先前有詔書說：『道以無為為宗。』姚嵩反駁說：『不知道所說的道的無為，應當以什麼作為它的本體？如果以妙為宗，即使在帝王之前，也不是最極端的。』秦王回答略云：『我的意思是，道止於無為，還未詳細瞭解它所宗的是什麼。』最後又說：『道以無寄託為宗。如果尋求寄託所在，恐怕是最大的迷惑。』文中有很多沒有記載，無為就是涅槃。因為依據生死推到涅槃，所以說流轉等。生死是果，必定從因招來，所以說執著于慾望的緣故。如果慾望止息於心以下，是說明返回生死而恢復涅槃。既然沒有生死以下，是承接前面來表明潛神，冥潛心神。玄默，比照寂默，默與漠字相通，玄妙寂默就是涅槃。虛空是舉例說明無相，大致相同，所以說合德。《弘明集》中德字作體字。既然叫做涅槃以下，是正面顯明意思，說無為是宗極，返回生死有為，證得涅槃無為，無相無名，又有什麼呢？
【English Translation】 English version They shared a tacit understanding (referring to the mutual understanding between their minds). Understanding the Dao through eye contact (referring to understanding the Dao without words, only through eye contact). One should quickly exhaust the meaning within one's heart. Therefore, one can revitalize the profound Dharma to enlighten the customs of the degenerate age. The Analects says: 'Virtue is never solitary; it always has neighbors.' Because the King of Qin established virtuous governance, it moved Master Shi to come. They resonated with each other, and their interests aligned perfectly. Therefore, their minds were in harmony, and they understood the Dao through eye contact. The following is a brief excerpt from Zhuangzi: When Wen Bo Xuezi went to Qi, Confucius met him, and they did not exchange a single word. Zilu asked Confucius: 'People like them can understand the Dao through eye contact.' It means that their eyes met and they already understood the meaning of the Dao. 'Square inch' refers to the heart. The two were of one mind, to promote the Dharma and enlighten the customs of the degenerate age. 'Wind' refers to moral influence. 'Enlighten' means to open.
One day, Meng replied to a letter from Marquis Yao Song of Ancheng, asking what the ultimate principle of non-action (Wuwei) is. The reply was: The reason why sentient beings are perpetually transmigrating in birth and death is all due to their attachment to desires. If desires cease in the mind, then there will be no more birth and death. Since there is no birth and death, the mind becomes hidden and silent, merging its virtue with the void. This is called Nirvana. Since it is called Nirvana, how can it allow a name to exist within it? Yao Song was also a member of the Qin royal family. According to Volume 18 of the Tang Hongming Ji, it is briefly stated: The King of Qin previously issued an edict saying: 'The Dao takes non-action as its principle.' Yao Song retorted: 'I do not understand what the so-called non-action of the Dao should take as its substance. If it takes subtlety as its principle, even before the emperor, it is not the most extreme.' The King of Qin replied briefly: 'My meaning is that the Dao stops at non-action, and I have not yet understood in detail what it takes as its principle.' Finally, it also said: 'The Dao takes non-reliance as its principle. If one seeks a place to rely on, I am afraid it is the greatest delusion.' There is much unrecorded in the text, non-action is Nirvana. Because it is based on birth and death and deduced to Nirvana, it is said to be transmigrating, etc. Birth and death are the result, which must be caused by the cause, so it is said to be due to attachment to desires. 'If desires cease in the mind' below explains returning from birth and death and restoring Nirvana. 'Since there is no birth and death' below is to carry on the previous statement to show the hidden mind, the mind is hidden and silent. Profound silence, compared to stillness and silence, silence and stillness are interchangeable, profound and subtle silence is Nirvana. The void is an example of non-form, roughly the same, so it is said to be merging virtue. In the Hongming Ji, the word virtue is used as the word substance. 'Since it is called Nirvana' below is to directly clarify the meaning, saying that non-action is the ultimate principle, returning from birth and death to action, proving Nirvana is non-action, non-form, and nameless, what else is there?
體何宗。恐心有所繫。當以無寄為宗耳。
斯乃窮微言之美。極像外之談者也。自非道參(合)文殊德侔(各)慈氏。孰能宣揚玄道為法城塹。使夫大教卷而復舒。幽旨淪而更顯 初二句美其解深。微言者經論也。得經論之。美趣盡物外之高談。自非下嘆其德遠。王者四海之尊三寶之主。嘆雖過實勢合如斯使夫下謂佛法大教卷而復伸。無名幽旨沈而又彰。皆王之力也。
尋玩慇勤不能暫舍。欣悟交懷手舞弗暇 謂所得既深欣感亦厚。不期于舞手。自舞之舞之弗止。亦應足之蹈之。
豈直當時之勝軌。方乃累劫之津樑矣 教既弘闡利及無窮。
然聖旨淵玄理微言約(少)可以匠(法)彼先進拯拔高士。懼言題(名)之流。或未盡上意。庶擬孔易十翼之作。豈貪豐文。圖以弘顯幽旨。輒(特)作涅槃無名論。論有九折十演。博採眾經托證成譬。以仰述陛下無名之致。豈曰關詣神心窮究遠當聊以擬議(法)玄門。班(布)喻學徒耳 可以下謂無名之旨深妙。唯可法于先進拔高士之疑也。懼言題等者。謂守名言之輩但聞無名。未能盡解上意上屬王也。司馬遷紀事以帝為上。故庶擬下謂比擬十翼。以作十演且被。守言後進之輩。易本伏羲畫卦。文王繇辭。周公系爻。孔子作十翼。即上彖下彖等。今九折
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：它的本體是什麼？恐怕心有所執著，應當以無所寄託為宗旨。
這實在是窮盡精微語言之美，達到形象之外的談論啊。如果不是智慧可以比肩文殊菩薩（Manjusri，智慧的象徵），德行可以媲美彌勒菩薩（Maitreya，未來佛），誰能夠宣揚玄妙的佛道，作為堅固的法城壁壘，使得佛法大教捲起又舒展，深奧的旨意沉沒又顯現呢？開頭兩句讚美其理解深刻。'微言'指的是經論。得經論之美，趣味窮盡於物外的高談闊論。'自非'以下讚歎其德行深遠。王者是四海的尊者，三寶的主人。讚歎雖然有些過分，但情勢理應如此。'使夫'以下說佛法大教捲起又舒展，無名的深奧旨意沉沒又彰顯，都是王的力量啊。
反覆尋味，慇勤不捨，欣喜領悟交織於心，手舞足蹈都來不及。說所得既深，欣喜感動也深厚，不是期望去舞動雙手，而是自然而然地舞動，舞動不止，也應該用腳去蹈之。
難道僅僅是當時的殊勝途徑嗎？實在是累劫的津樑啊！佛法教義既然弘揚闡述，利益涉及無窮。
然而聖上的旨意淵深玄妙，道理精微語言簡略，可以傚法那些先進，拯救拔擢高士，擔心拘泥於名相的人，或者未能完全理解聖上的意思。所以想效仿孔子作《易經》十翼的做法，豈是貪圖文采豐富，而是爲了弘揚顯現深奧的旨意，特地作《涅槃無名論》。此論有九折十演，廣泛採納眾多經典，依託證據成就譬喻，以此來仰述陛下無名的深意。豈敢說能關合神心，窮究深遠，只是姑且用法度來擬議玄門，頒佈譬喻給學徒罷了。'可以'以下說無名的旨意深妙，只能傚法先進，解除高士的疑惑。'懼言題等者'，是說拘泥於名言的人，只聽說'無名'，未能完全理解聖上的意思，這裡的'上'指的是王。司馬遷記載史事以帝為上，所以'庶擬'以下說比擬十翼，來作十演，並且施與拘泥於言辭的後進之人。《易經》原本是伏羲畫卦，文王繫辭，周公系爻，孔子作十翼，即上彖下彖等。現在是九折。
【English Translation】 English version: What is its fundamental principle? I fear that the mind may be attached to something, so it should take non-attachment as its principle.
This truly exhausts the beauty of subtle language and reaches discussions beyond form. If one's wisdom is not comparable to Manjusri (symbol of wisdom) and one's virtue is not equal to Maitreya (the future Buddha), who can propagate the profound Buddha-dharma as a strong fortress, causing the great teachings of Buddhism to be rolled up and then unfolded again, and the profound meanings to be submerged and then revealed again? The first two sentences praise the depth of understanding. 'Subtle language' refers to the sutras and treatises. Obtaining the beauty of the sutras and treatises, the interest is exhausted in lofty discussions beyond things. 'If not' below praises the far-reaching virtue. The king is the honored one of the four seas and the master of the Three Jewels. Although the praise is somewhat excessive, the situation should be like this. 'Causing' below says that the great teachings of Buddhism are rolled up and then unfolded again, and the profound meaning of no-name is submerged and then revealed, all due to the power of the king.
Pondering and playing with it diligently, I cannot bear to part with it even for a moment. Joyful understanding intertwines in my heart, and I have no time to dance with my hands and feet. It is said that what is gained is deep, and the joy and emotion are also deep. It is not expected to move one's hands, but to dance naturally, dancing without stopping, and one should also use one's feet to tread.
Is it merely a superior path of that time? It is truly a ferry for countless kalpas! Since the Buddhist teachings have been propagated and elucidated, the benefits extend infinitely.
However, the holy will is profound and mysterious, the principle is subtle, and the language is concise. One can emulate those advanced ones to rescue and elevate noble scholars, fearing that those who are attached to names may not fully understand the meaning of the sovereign. Therefore, I intend to imitate Confucius's work of the Ten Wings of the Book of Changes, not because I am greedy for rich writing, but to promote and reveal the profound meaning. I have specially composed the 'Nirvana No-Name Treatise'. This treatise has nine refutations and ten expositions, widely adopting many scriptures, relying on evidence to create metaphors, in order to describe the profound meaning of no-name of Your Majesty. How dare I say that I can connect with the divine mind and exhaust the distant, I just use the law to propose the mysterious door and distribute metaphors to the students. 'Can' below says that the meaning of no-name is profound and wonderful, and can only be modeled on the advanced ones to resolve the doubts of noble scholars. 'Fearing those who speak of titles, etc.' means that those who are attached to names only hear 'no-name' and cannot fully understand the meaning of the sovereign, where 'above' refers to the king. Sima Qian recorded historical events with the emperor as the superior, so 'I intend' below says to imitate the Ten Wings to make ten expositions, and to give them to those who are attached to words. The Book of Changes was originally drawn by Fu Xi, the words were attached by King Wen, the lines were attached by the Duke of Zhou, and Confucius made the Ten Wings, that is, the upper and lower commentaries, etc. Now it is nine refutations.
十演彷彿於斯。豈貪下不在廣文而在演旨。輒作下可知。豈曰下雖作演論。不敢自謂關涉造詣神妙之心。極盡玄遠允當之理。聊以下但仿法妙理之門。布曉學者爾。
論末章云。諸家通第一義諦。皆云廓然空寂無有聖人。吾常以為乖殊太甚逕庭不近人情。若無聖人知無者誰 末章者答。姚嵩書末後之章。廓然下時計勝義空寂不容有聖。吾常下正明。乖殊差異也。下二句莊子文。林希逸云疆界相遠也。今言太甚。蓋遠之又遠。若無下反核。由證勝義故為聖人。今為無有者證無者非聖而誰。無指空寂。
實如明詔。實如明詔。夫道恍惚窈冥其中有精。若無聖人誰與道游。頃諸學徒莫不躊躇道門怏怏此旨。懷疑終日莫之能正 初二句正許。夫道下出理。恍惚下文借老氏。彼云。恍兮惚。其中有物。窈兮冥。其中有精。謂有無難象故云恍惚。深窈叵測故云窈冥。以窈冥目空寂。有精目聖人。躊躇者。將進將退之貌。怏怏謂中心郁滯不通之謂。
幸遭高判。宗徒㦎(火麥切)然扣關之儔。蔚登玄室。真可謂法輪再轉于。閻浮道光重映于千載者矣 㦎破帛聲喻疑情破也蔚草木盛貌。玄室謂勝義涅槃意云。達逢明君高見判決。疑蓋㦎然而裂。扣關者盛登于玄室也。真可謂下嘆。
今演論之作(立)旨曲辨涅
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
十演的寫作，彷彿就在眼前。難道是因為貪圖下筆，不在於廣博的文采，而在於闡明宗旨嗎？因此寫下這些可以理解的內容。難道說雖然寫了演論，卻不敢自認為涉及到了精妙高深的境界，窮盡了玄妙深遠而又恰當的道理，只不過是傚法妙理之門，向學者們略作講解罷了。 論末章說：『各家通達第一義諦（paramārtha-satya，最高真理），都說空曠寂靜，沒有聖人。我常常認為這種說法差異太大，相距遙遠，不近人情。如果沒有聖人，誰來認知這空無呢？』末章，是回答姚嵩書信末尾的章節。『廓然』等句，是說計度勝義諦（paramārtha-satya，最高真理）是空寂的，不容許有聖人存在。『吾常』等句，是正面闡明。『乖殊』是差異的意思。下面兩句是莊子的話。林希逸說，疆界相距遙遠。現在說『太甚』，是說遙遠之又遠。『若無』等句是反駁。因為證得勝義諦（paramārtha-satya，最高真理）的緣故，才成為聖人。現在說沒有聖人，那麼認知這空無的，如果不是聖人，又是誰呢？『無』指的是空寂。 確實如明詔一般。確實如明詔一般。道恍惚幽深，其中有精。如果沒有聖人，誰與道同遊呢？近來學徒們無不猶豫不決，對於這個宗旨感到不滿，懷疑終日，不能夠糾正。最初兩句是正面肯定。『夫道』等句是闡述道理。『恍惚』等句是借用老子的話。老子說：『恍兮惚兮，其中有物；窈兮冥兮，其中有精。』意思是說，有和無難以捉摸，所以說是恍惚。深邃幽暗難以測度，所以說是窈冥。用窈冥來指代空寂，用有精來指代聖人。『躊躇』是想要前進又想要後退的樣子。『怏怏』是說心中鬱結不通暢的意思。 幸好遇到高明的判斷。宗門弟子疑慮頓消，如同敲開門扉一樣，紛紛進入玄妙的殿堂。真可以說是法輪再次轉動于閻浮提（Jambudvīpa，我們所居住的這個世界），佛道的光芒重新照耀于千年之後了。疑慮頓消，如同撕裂帛布的聲音一樣，比喻疑情破除。『蔚』是草木茂盛的樣子。玄室指的是勝義涅槃（nirvāṇa，寂滅）的意思，意思是說，通達的人遇到英明的君主，高明的見解和判決，疑慮的蓋子一下子就被揭開了，如同敲開門扉一樣，紛紛進入玄妙的殿堂。『真可謂』等句是讚歎。 現在演論的寫作，宗旨在於詳細辨析涅槃（nirvāṇa，寂滅）。
【English Translation】 English version:
The writing of the 'Ten Discourses' seems to be right before our eyes. Is it perhaps because of a desire to write, not focusing on broad literary talent, but rather on elucidating the main points? Therefore, these understandable contents are written down. Can it be said that although the 'Discourses' are written, one does not dare to claim to have reached a profound and subtle state, to have exhausted the mysterious, far-reaching, and appropriate principles, but merely imitates the gateway to wonderful principles, briefly explaining them to scholars? The final chapter of the treatise says: 'All schools that understand the paramārtha-satya (highest truth) say that it is vast and empty, without any sages. I have always thought that this statement is too different, too far apart, and not close to human feelings. If there are no sages, who will know this emptiness?' The final chapter is the reply to the last chapter of Yao Song's letter. 'Guoran' and the following sentences mean that the measurement of paramārtha-satya (highest truth) is empty and silent, not allowing the existence of sages. 'I often' and the following sentences are a direct explanation. 'Guaishu' means difference. The following two sentences are from Zhuangzi. Lin Xiyi said that the boundaries are far apart. Now saying 'too much' means far away and even farther. 'If there is no' and the following sentences are a rebuttal. Because of attaining paramārtha-satya (highest truth), one becomes a sage. Now saying that there are no sages, then who is it that knows this emptiness if not a sage? 'Emptiness' refers to emptiness and silence. It is indeed like a clear decree. It is indeed like a clear decree. The Dao is vague and profound, and within it there is essence. If there are no sages, who will travel with the Dao? Recently, all the disciples have been hesitant and dissatisfied with this principle, doubting all day long and unable to correct it. The first two sentences are a positive affirmation. 'The Dao' and the following sentences explain the principle. 'Vague' and the following sentences borrow from Lao Tzu. Lao Tzu said: 'Vague and elusive, there is something within; deep and dark, there is essence within.' It means that existence and non-existence are difficult to grasp, so it is said to be vague. Deep and dark, difficult to measure, so it is said to be profound. Using profound darkness to refer to emptiness and silence, and using essence to refer to sages. 'Hesitant' is the appearance of wanting to advance and wanting to retreat. 'Discontented' means that the heart is depressed and not smooth. Fortunately, we have encountered a brilliant judgment. The disciples of the sect have dispelled their doubts, as if knocking on a door, and have entered the mysterious hall. It can truly be said that the Dharma wheel has turned again in Jambudvīpa (the world we live in), and the light of the Buddha's path shines again after a thousand years. The doubts are dispelled, like the sound of tearing silk, which is a metaphor for the breaking of doubts. 'Luxuriant' is the appearance of lush vegetation. The mysterious hall refers to the meaning of paramārtha-nirvāṇa (nirvāṇa, extinction), meaning that those who have attained enlightenment encounter enlightened rulers, brilliant insights and judgments, and the lid of doubt is lifted all at once, as if knocking on a door, and they enter the mysterious hall. 'It can truly be said' and the following sentences are exclamations. Now, the writing of the 'Discourses' aims to carefully distinguish nirvana (nirvāṇa, extinction).
槃無名之體。寂彼廓然。排方外之談 作意有三。一演無名二寂異說。三按梁傳。亦有什公長往。翹思彌厲惑而作也。云庵云。寂者息也。息諸家廓然斷見也。排斥逐也。前文別無敘方外之說。今兼排斥。意謂當時學流計空廓無聖。方為物外或排權小界內生死界外涅槃等。今體用不二誰內誰外耶。故下云。標其方域不亦邈哉。
條牒如左。謹以仰呈。若少參(同)聖旨。愿敕存記如其有差。伏承指授僧肇言 條謂條段。牒謂紙未有時但書簡牒今從古用。條段十演于牒以進。指授者。指示教授謙禮于君。本傳云。興覽之答旨慇勤備加贊述。敕令繕寫班諸子侄。其為時所推重如此。
泥曰泥洹涅槃此三名前後異出。蓋是楚夏不同耳。云涅槃音正也 西來梵僧五竺不同。鄉音成異。亦猶此方楚夏輕重。
九折十演者 折謂折辨。有名興難曰折。演謂流演。無名通情曰演。
開宗第一 十演之一也。開張也。宗本也。初略張宗本令識大義。後方折演委細巧示。令人深入。仿于孝經命章云爾。后之九演宗此演此。
無名曰。經稱有餘涅槃無餘涅槃者。秦言無為。亦名滅度 欲明無名之致。故牒有名之二。竟顯此二應物假號。以悟真常無名之妙。
無為者。取乎虛無寂寞妙絕於有為。滅度者
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『槃』（Pan，指涅槃的本體）是無名的本體。寂靜而空曠。排斥方外之談——作意有三：一是闡述無名，二是止息異說，三是依據《梁傳》。也有鳩摩羅什（Kumarajiva）大師逝去，思念更加強烈而作此論。云庵說：『寂』是止息的意思，止息各家空曠的斷滅之見。『排斥』是排擠斥逐的意思。前文沒有敘述方外之說，現在一併排斥，意思是當時學派認為空曠而無聖，才是物外之境，或者排斥權教的小乘，認為生死界之外才是涅槃等。現在體和用不二，哪裡有內和外呢？所以下面說：標明它的區域，不是太渺遠了嗎？
條陳如下，謹此呈上。如果稍微符合聖上的旨意，希望下令儲存記錄；如果有所差異，恭敬地聽取您的指教。僧肇（Sengzhao）謹言。『條』指條段，『牒』指紙張未普及的時候，用書簡來傳遞資訊，現在沿用古制。將十條論述寫在牒上進呈。『指授』是指示教授，是對君主的謙辭。本傳記載，皇上看了之後，回答的旨意慇勤，並加以讚揚，敕令繕寫分發給子侄。當時他被推崇重視到如此地步。
『泥』（Ni）曰『泥洹』（Nirvana），『涅槃』（Nirvana），這三個名稱前後出現不同，大概是楚國和夏國的方言不同罷了。云庵說，『涅槃』的音譯是正確的。西來的梵僧來自印度五方，鄉音不同，造成差異，也像我們這裡的楚國和夏國，口音有輕重之分。
『九折十演』是指什麼？『折』是折辨，有名而興起疑問叫做『折』。『演』是流演，無名而通達情理叫做『演』。
『開宗第一』是十演之一。『開』是開張，『宗』是根本。開始略微開張宗本，使人認識大義，然後才折辨流演，委婉細緻地巧妙地開示，使人深入理解，倣傚《孝經》的『命章』。後面的九演都以這一演為根本。
『無名』說：經書上說有餘涅槃、無餘涅槃，用秦朝的話來說，就是『無為』，也叫『滅度』。想要闡明無名的精妙之處，所以列舉有名的兩種涅槃，最終是爲了彰顯這兩種涅槃都是應物而生的假名，從而領悟真常無名的妙處。
『無為』，是取其虛無寂寞，美妙地超越了有為。『滅度』，是...
【English Translation】 English version: 『Pan』 (referring to the essence of Nirvana) is the body of the nameless. It is serene and vast. It refutes discussions outside the realm – there are three intentions: first, to expound the nameless; second, to cease divergent views; and third, to base it on the 『Liang Biography』. It is also made because Master Kumarajiva (Kumarajiva) passed away, and the longing became even more intense. Yun'an said: 『Serenity』 means cessation, ceasing the annihilationist views of emptiness held by various schools. 『Refutation』 means rejection and expulsion. The previous text did not describe discussions outside the realm, but now it refutes them all. It means that the scholars at that time thought that emptiness without holiness was the realm outside of things, or they rejected the provisional teachings of the Lesser Vehicle, thinking that Nirvana was outside the realm of birth and death. Now that essence and function are not two, where is the inside and outside? Therefore, it is said below: 『To mark its region, is it not too distant?』
The items are listed as follows, respectfully presented. If it slightly conforms to the Holy Will, I hope that an order will be given to preserve the record; if there are any differences, I respectfully listen to your instructions. Sengzhao (Sengzhao) respectfully says. 『Item』 refers to itemized sections, 『memorial』 refers to when paper was not yet popular, letters were used to transmit information, now following the ancient system. The ten discussions are written on the memorial to present. 『Instructions』 means to instruct and teach, a humble term to the ruler. The biography records that after the emperor read it, his reply was earnest and praised it, ordering it to be copied and distributed to his sons and nephews. He was so highly regarded at that time.
『Ni』 (Ni) says 『Nirvana』 (Nirvana), 『Nirvana』 (Nirvana), these three names appear differently at different times, probably because the dialects of Chu and Xia are different. Yun'an said that the transliteration of 『Nirvana』 is correct. The Sanskrit monks from the West come from the five regions of India, and their dialects are different, causing differences, just like the Chu and Xia dialects here, with different tones.
What does 『nine refutations and ten expositions』 refer to? 『Refutation』 means to refute, and to raise questions with names is called 『refutation』. 『Exposition』 means to flow and expound, and to communicate feelings and reason without names is called 『exposition』.
『Opening the Doctrine First』 is one of the ten expositions. 『Opening』 means to open up, 『doctrine』 means the root. At the beginning, slightly open up the doctrine, so that people can understand the great meaning, and then refute and expound, subtly and skillfully revealing it, so that people can deeply understand it, imitating the 『Commandment Chapter』 of the Classic of Filial Piety. The following nine expositions are all based on this one.
『Nameless』 says: The scriptures say that there are Nirvana with remainder and Nirvana without remainder, which in the Qin dynasty language is called 『non-action』 (Wuwei), also called 『extinction』. Wanting to explain the subtlety of the nameless, so listing the two kinds of Nirvana with names, ultimately to highlight that these two kinds of Nirvana are false names arising in response to things, so as to realize the wonderfulness of the true and constant nameless.
『Non-action』 (Wuwei) takes its emptiness and tranquility, wonderfully surpassing action. 『Extinction』 is...
。言其大患永滅超度四流 無為據體而言。滅度息障而稱。分段變易為大患。欲見有癡為四流。
斯蓋是映象之所歸。絕稱謂之幽宅也 初句喻況。以明所歸。后句法說。略彰無名。有無之跡如鏡中之像。像虛歸鏡跡虛歸性。此句絕相下句離名。幽宅目涅槃。以是三乘九流之所歸處。義言宅也。問若云絕稱。何立二名。
而曰有餘無餘者。良是出處之異號。應物之假名耳 出處猶動靜也。出名有餘處名無餘。出處不同有無名異。應物而有。不應則無以故為假。
余嘗試言之。夫涅槃之為道也。寂寥虛曠不可以形名得。微妙無相不可以有心知。超群有以幽升。量太虛而永久。隨之弗得其蹤。迎之罔(不)眺(見)其首。六趣不能攝其生。力負無以化其體。潢漭恍惚若存若往。五目莫睹其容。二聽不聞其響。冥冥窅窅誰見誰曉。彌綸靡所不在。而獨曳(出)于有無之表 夫涅下總十九句。初句標體余皆辨相。即自性清凈涅槃通凡及聖。如出現經體性真常門。初二對皆上句顯相。下句顯離。前離名相后離心緣。群有下二十五有離苦也。量太下量等太虛而永久。妙存非空也。隨之下二句非前後際。離無常也。六趣下二句生滅離也。亦離無我。謂涅槃真我有實主宰自在義故。不能攝之令生化之令滅。此約破二
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 說的是永遠滅除分段生死和變易生死的大患，超脫欲流、有流、見流、無明流這四種瀑流，以無為作為本體而說的。滅度是止息煩惱障礙的稱謂。分段生死和變易生死是最大的禍患。想要有（生存），錯誤的見解和愚癡是四種瀑流。
這大概就是萬象歸宿的地方，是斷絕一切名相稱謂的幽深居所啊。第一句是比喻，用來說明歸宿之處。后一句是法說，簡略地闡明了無名。有和無的痕跡就像鏡中的影像，影像虛幻最終歸於鏡子，痕跡虛幻最終歸於自性。這句是斷絕一切相，下一句是脫離一切名。幽宅指的是涅槃（Nirvana），因為這裡是三乘（Sravakayana, Pratyekabuddhayana, Bodhisattvayana）九流（九種眾生）所歸宿的地方，所以用『宅』來形容。問：如果說是斷絕一切稱謂，為何還要設立『有餘』和『無餘』這兩個名稱呢？
之所以說有餘涅槃（Saupadhisésa-nirvána）和無餘涅槃（Anupadhisesa-nirvana），實在是出現和歸處的不同稱謂，是應和事物而產生的假名罷了。出現和歸處就像動和靜一樣。出現叫做有餘，歸處叫做無餘。出現和歸處不同，有餘和無餘的名稱也不同。應和事物而有，不應和事物就沒有，所以說是假名。
我嘗試著說說。涅槃（Nirvana）這種道理啊，寂靜空曠，不可以憑藉形狀和名稱來獲得；微妙而沒有形象，不可以憑藉有分別的心來了解。超越一切有而幽深上升，它的廣大量等同於太虛空而永久存在。跟隨它，無法得到它的軌跡；迎向它，無法看到它的開端。六道（地獄、餓鬼、畜生、阿修羅、人、天）不能攝取它的生，業力不能改變它的本體。廣大無邊，恍惚不定，好像存在又好像逝去。五眼（肉眼、天眼、慧眼、法眼、佛眼）不能看到它的容貌，兩種聽覺（耳根和耳識）不能聽到它的聲響。幽深黑暗，誰能看見誰能明白？它瀰漫充斥，無所不在，卻獨自超脫于有和無的表象之外。總而言之，下面十九句，第一句標明本體，其餘都是辨析它的相狀。自性清凈涅槃（Nirvana）通於凡夫和聖人，如《出現經》所說的體性真常門。前面的兩對都是上句顯現它的相狀，下句顯現它的遠離。前面是遠離名相，後面是遠離心緣。『群有』下句是遠離二十五有之苦。『量太』下句是說它的廣大量等同於太虛空而永久存在，微妙存在不是空無。『隨之』下兩句是說它沒有前後際，遠離無常。『六趣』下兩句是說它遠離生滅，也遠離無我，因為涅槃（Nirvana）真我具有真實的主宰和自在的意義，所以六道不能攝取它使它產生，業力不能改變它使它滅亡。這是破除二...
【English Translation】 English version: It speaks of the great suffering of perpetual extinction, transcending the four streams of Samsara and transformation, taking 'Wu Wei' (non-action) as its essence. 'Extinction' is the term for ceasing obstacles. The suffering of Samsara and transformation is the greatest affliction. The desire for existence, wrong views, and ignorance are the four streams.
This is probably where all phenomena return, a profound abode beyond all names and descriptions. The first sentence is a metaphor, clarifying the place of return. The second sentence is a Dharma teaching, briefly elucidating the nameless. The traces of existence and non-existence are like images in a mirror. The illusory image returns to the mirror, and the illusory traces return to the nature. This sentence cuts off all forms, and the next sentence separates from all names. 'Profound abode' refers to Nirvana (Nirvana), as it is the place of return for the three vehicles (Sravakayana, Pratyekabuddhayana, Bodhisattvayana) and the nine streams (nine kinds of beings), hence the term 'abode'. Question: If it is said to be beyond all names, why establish the two names of 'with remainder' and 'without remainder'?
The reason for saying 'Nirvana with remainder' (Saupadhisésa-nirvána) and 'Nirvana without remainder' (Anupadhisesa-nirvana) is truly because of the different terms for appearance and return, merely provisional names in response to things. Appearance and return are like movement and stillness. Appearance is called 'with remainder', and return is called 'without remainder'. Appearance and return are different, and the names of 'with remainder' and 'without remainder' are also different. It exists in response to things, and it does not exist when not in response to things, therefore it is called provisional.
Let me try to explain it. This principle of Nirvana (Nirvana) is tranquil and vast, not obtainable through form and name; subtle and without form, not knowable through a discriminating mind. It transcends all existence and ascends profoundly, its vastness equals the great void and is eternal. Following it, one cannot find its traces; facing it, one cannot see its beginning. The six realms (hell, hungry ghosts, animals, asuras, humans, devas) cannot contain its birth, and karmic forces cannot transform its essence. Vast and boundless, vague and uncertain, it seems to exist and seems to vanish. The five eyes (physical eye, heavenly eye, wisdom eye, Dharma eye, Buddha eye) cannot see its appearance, and the two kinds of hearing (ear faculty and ear consciousness) cannot hear its sound. Deep and obscure, who can see and who can understand? It pervades everything, yet it alone transcends the appearance of existence and non-existence. In short, the following nineteen sentences, the first sentence marks the essence, and the rest are analyses of its characteristics. The self-nature pure Nirvana (Nirvana) is common to both ordinary beings and sages, as the 'Essence of True Constancy' in the 'Appearance Sutra' says. The previous two pairs, the upper sentence reveals its characteristics, and the lower sentence reveals its separation. The former is separation from names and forms, and the latter is separation from mental conditions. The sentence 'all existence' is about being away from the suffering of the twenty-five existences. The sentence 'measure the great' means that its vastness is equal to the great void and is eternal, and subtle existence is not emptiness. The following two sentences 'following it' mean that it has no beginning or end, and is away from impermanence. The following two sentences 'six realms' mean that it is away from birth and death, and also away from no-self, because Nirvana (Nirvana) true self has the meaning of true master and freedom, so the six realms cannot contain it to make it arise, and karmic forces cannot transform it to make it perish. This is to break the two...
乘末四倒以釋。潢漭下積水成池曰潢。水大曰漭。今取廣大之義。存往難定故云恍惚謂言存此邈然往彼謂言往彼。居然存此。亦如老氏。大曰逝逝曰反。亦可存往猶有無也。五目下成前無相。五目即五眼。二聽即二耳。成前無名。冥冥下冥幽也。目深曰窅。今取深義。誰見誰曉成前離心。彌綸者。包羅之義。靡所不在者。華嚴云。法性遍在一切處等。
然則言之者失其真。知之者反其愚。有之者乖其性。無之者傷其軀 不知非名非相。強言強知。故失真而反愚。不知非有非無強謂有無。故乖性而傷軀。傷軀者。身本性起今既為無。故自傷身。東安莊公云。有質不成。搜源則冥。無質不成。緣起萬形。
所以釋迦掩室于摩竭。凈名杜口于毗耶。須菩提唱無說以顯道。釋梵絕聽而雨花 通引三事。前二明無說。后一兼明無聽。反證前言之者失其真。摩竭國名。法華說。如來成佛三七日中而不說法。智論第七云。佛得道五十七日不說等。義言掩室也。凈名經事可知。釋梵等者。大品般若自天主品以來。須菩提依幻化喻。廣說甚深般若無說無聽之理。至散花品釋提桓因及三千大千世界中四天王等。化作天花散佛及大眾上等。意云。須菩提以說聽空。故說而無說。以顯實相。諸天解空聽而無聽。為供深法故散花也。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『乘末四倒以釋』。『潢漭』指下積水而成池，稱為『潢』。水勢浩大稱為『漭』。這裡取其廣大的意思。『存往難定故云恍惚』，意思是說存在於此，卻又彷彿前往彼處；說前往彼處，卻又似乎存在於此。也像老子所說，『大曰逝，逝曰反』，也可以理解為存在與前往，猶如『有』與『無』。『五目下成前無相』，『五目』即五眼，『二聽』即二耳，成就了眼前沒有相狀的境界。『冥冥下冥幽也』，『窅』是眼睛深邃的樣子，這裡取深邃的意思。『誰見誰曉成前離心』，『彌綸』是包羅的意思，『靡所不在』，如同《華嚴經》所說：『法性遍在一切處』等等。
『然則言之者失其真，知之者反其愚，有之者乖其性，無之者傷其軀』。不瞭解『非名非相』的道理，卻強行言說、強行認知，所以喪失真理而變得愚昧。不瞭解『非有非無』的道理，卻強行說成『有』或『無』，所以違背本性而傷害自身。『傷軀者，身本性起今既為無，故自傷身』，傷害自身，是因為身體本由自性而生起，現在卻強行認為它不存在，所以是自我傷害。東安莊公說：『有質不成，搜源則冥。無質不成，緣起萬形』。
『所以釋迦掩室于摩竭，凈名杜口于毗耶，須菩提唱無說以顯道，釋梵絕聽而雨花』。這裡貫通引用了三件事。前兩件事說明『無說』，后一件事兼明『無聽』，反過來印證前面所說的『言之者失其真』。『摩竭』是國名。《法華經》說，如來成佛后三七日中沒有說法。《智論》第七卷說，佛得道后五十七日沒有說法等等，都是指掩室這件事。『凈名經事可知』，《維摩詰經》的故事大家都知道。『釋梵等者』，《大品般若經》從自天主品開始，須菩提用幻化的比喻，廣泛地闡述了甚深般若『無說無聽』的道理。到散花品時，釋提桓因和三千大千世界中的四天王等，變化出天花散在佛和大眾身上等等。意思是說，須菩提因為通達了『說』和『聽』的空性，所以『說』而無『說』，以此來顯現實相。諸天理解了『空』，『聽』而無『聽』，爲了供養甚深佛法，所以散花。
【English Translation】 English version: 『Multiplying the last four inversions to explain.』 『Huangmang』 refers to water accumulating to form a pond, called 『huang』 (pool). A large body of water is called 『mang』 (vast). Here, it takes the meaning of vastness. 『Existence and going are difficult to determine, hence the term 『vague』 (huanghu)』 means that it exists here, yet seems to go there; saying it goes there, yet it seems to exist here. It is also like Laozi said, 『Great is called fleeting, fleeting is called returning.』 It can also be understood as existence and going, like 『being』 and 『non-being.』 『Five eyes below form the absence of form before』 means 『five eyes』 are the five eyes, 『two ears』 are the two ears, achieving the state of no form before the eyes. 『Míngmíng below means profound,』 『yao』 (deep) is the appearance of deep eyes, here taking the meaning of depth. 『Who sees who understands forms the separation of mind before,』 『milun』 (encompassing) means encompassing, 『nowhere not present,』 like the Huayan Sutra says: 『The Dharma-nature pervades all places,』 etc.
『Therefore, those who speak lose their truth, those who know become foolish, those who have deviate from their nature, those who have not harm their bodies.』 Not understanding the principle of 『neither name nor form,』 yet forcibly speaking and forcibly knowing, therefore losing the truth and becoming foolish. Not understanding the principle of 『neither being nor non-being,』 yet forcibly calling it 『being』 or 『non-being,』 therefore deviating from one's nature and harming oneself. 『Harming the body means the body originally arises from nature, now it is considered non-existent, therefore harming oneself.』 Harming oneself is because the body originally arises from self-nature, but now it is forcibly considered non-existent, so it is self-harm. Dong'an Zhuang Gong said: 『Having substance does not form, searching the source is dark. Without substance does not form, conditions arise to myriad forms.』
『Therefore, Shakya closed his room in Magadha (kingdom), Vimalakirti (pure name) kept silent in Vaishali (city), Subhuti (good being) sang of no-speaking to reveal the Tao (the way), Shakra (釋) and Brahma (梵) ceased listening and rained flowers.』 Here, three events are quoted together. The first two events illustrate 『no-speaking,』 and the last event also illustrates 『no-listening,』 which in turn confirms the previous statement 『those who speak lose their truth.』 『Magadha』 is the name of a country. The Lotus Sutra says that the Tathagata did not speak for three seven days after becoming a Buddha. The seventh volume of the Zhi Lun (treatise) says that the Buddha did not speak for fifty-seven days after attaining the Tao, etc., all referring to the event of closing the room. 『The story of Vimalakirti is known,』 everyone knows the story of the Vimalakirti Sutra. 『Shakra and Brahma, etc.,』 from the Zitianzhu chapter of the Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra, Subhuti used the metaphor of illusion to extensively explain the principle of 『no-speaking and no-listening』 of the profound Prajna (wisdom). In the Scattering Flowers chapter, Shakra Devendra and the Four Heavenly Kings, etc., in the three thousand great thousand worlds, transformed into heavenly flowers and scattered them on the Buddha and the assembly, etc. The meaning is that Subhuti, because he understood the emptiness of 『speaking』 and 『listening,』 therefore 『spoke』 without 『speaking,』 thereby revealing the true nature. The devas understood 『emptiness,』 『listened』 without 『listening,』 and scattered flowers to offer the profound Dharma.
斯皆理為神遇。故口以之而默。豈曰無辨。辨所不能言也 斯皆者。通指上三。唯證相應。所以口皆默也。非謂釋迦凈名無樂說之辯。但有辯而不能說也。
經曰。真解脫者。離於言數。寂滅永安無始無終。不晦不明不寒不暑。湛若虛空無名無說。論曰。涅槃非有亦復非無。言語道斷心行處滅 義引涅槃凈名等經。涅槃第五廣說真解脫相。二十一中亦說。涅槃非諸相故。凈名阿閦佛品說觀實相。文亦多同。細引恐繁。大義涅槃之。體即是諸法實相第一義。空絕於名數離諸對待。性本自離非方便也。論即中論。
尋夫經論之作(立)豈虛構(造)哉。果有其所以不有故。不可得而有。有其所以不無故。不可得而無耳 詮理為教。茍無其理。豈虛造其文矣。
何者(徴)本(尋)之有境。則五陰永滅。推之無鄉則幽靈不竭(盡)幽靈不竭則抱一湛然。五陰永滅則萬累都捐(棄)萬累都捐故與道通同。抱一湛然故神而無功。神而無功故至功常存。與道通同故沖(深)而不改。沖而不改故不可為有至功常存故。不可為無 初二對有無雙非。二種苦陰已亡。故云永滅。無亦非鄉。但有無疆域兩異。義言鄉也。般若妙存。故云不竭。與理冥一。故云抱一。惑業苦事如塵如沙。故萬累。都捐者。真解脫故
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 這些都是理體與神識相遇合的結果。所以即使開口也等同於沉默，難道是沒有辯才嗎？而是辯才所無法表達的境界。『斯皆者』，是概括指代前面的三種情況，只有證悟才能與之相應，所以開口也等同於沉默。並非說釋迦牟尼和維摩詰沒有善於言辭的辯才，而是說他們有辯才，但（對於真理）卻無法用言語來表達。
《維摩詰經》說：『真正的解脫，是遠離言語和數量，寂靜、滅除、永遠安樂，沒有開始也沒有終結，不昏暗也不明亮，不寒冷也不炎熱，清澈如虛空，沒有名稱也無法言說。』《大智度論》說：『涅槃非有也非無，言語的道路斷絕，心識的活動止息。』這裡引用的義理來自《涅槃經》、《維摩詰經》等。《涅槃經》第五卷廣泛地闡述了真解脫的相狀，第二十一卷也說到，涅槃不是各種表相。維摩詰經《阿閦佛國品》中說到觀察實相，文句也有很多相同之處，如果詳細引用恐怕過於繁瑣，大體上說，涅槃的本體就是諸法實相第一義，空寂而超越名數，遠離各種對待，其自性本來就是遠離的，而不是通過方便法門達到的。《論》指的是《中論》。
探究經論的寫作，難道是虛構的嗎？確實有它的原因。因為沒有『有』的原因，所以不可能得到『有』；因為有『無』的原因，所以不可能得到『無』。
用詮釋義理來作為教法，如果沒有這個義理，怎麼會憑空捏造這些文字呢？
什麼是本源的『有』的境界呢？那就是五陰（蘊）永遠滅除。推究『無』的境地，那就是幽深的精神永遠不會窮盡。幽深的精神不會窮盡，那麼抱守真一就會清澈明凈。五陰（蘊）永遠滅除，那麼各種牽累都會拋棄。各種牽累都拋棄，所以能與道融會貫通。抱守真一而清澈明凈，所以神妙而沒有造作的痕跡。神妙而沒有造作的痕跡，所以至高的功用長存。與道融會貫通，所以深邃而不可改變。深邃而不可改變，所以不能認為是『有』；至高的功用長存，所以不能認為是『無』。
最初的兩句是對於『有』和『無』的雙重否定。兩種苦陰已經消亡，所以說永遠滅除。『無』也不是一個處所，只是有疆界和沒有疆界兩種不同的意義，所以說是『鄉』。般若的妙用長存，所以說不會窮盡。與真理冥合為一，所以說是『抱一』。迷惑、業障、苦難之事如同塵土沙礫，所以說各種牽累都拋棄了，這是真正的解脫。
【English Translation】 English version: These are all the results of the union of the principle (理 – lǐ) and the spirit (神 – shén). Therefore, even speaking is equivalent to silence. Is it that there is no eloquence? Rather, it is that which eloquence cannot express. 『斯皆者 (sī jiē zhě)』 generally refers to the above three situations. Only enlightenment can correspond to it, so speaking is equivalent to silence. It is not that Śākyamuni (釋迦 – Shìjiā) and Vimalakīrti (凈名 – Jìngmíng) do not have the eloquence of skillful speech, but that they have eloquence but cannot express (the truth) with words.
The Vimalakīrti Sutra says: 『True liberation is to be apart from words and numbers, tranquil, extinguished, eternally peaceful, without beginning and without end, neither dim nor bright, neither cold nor hot, clear like the void, without name and without saying.』 The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: 『Nirvana (涅槃 – Nièpán) is neither existent nor non-existent, the path of language is cut off, and the activity of the mind ceases.』 The meaning quoted here comes from the Nirvana Sutra, the Vimalakīrti Sutra, etc. The fifth volume of the Nirvana Sutra extensively explains the characteristics of true liberation, and the twenty-first volume also says that Nirvana is not various appearances. The Akshobhya Buddha chapter of the Vimalakīrti Sutra speaks of observing the true nature of reality, and the sentences are also very similar. If I quote in detail, I am afraid it will be too cumbersome. Generally speaking, the substance of Nirvana is the first principle of the true nature of all dharmas, empty and beyond names and numbers, and away from all duality. Its nature is inherently detached, not achieved through expedient means. 『論 (lùn)』 refers to the Madhyamaka-kārikā (中論 – Zhōnglùn).
Investigating the writing of the sutras and treatises, is it fabricated? Indeed, there is a reason for it. Because there is no reason for 『existence』, it is impossible to obtain 『existence』; because there is a reason for 『non-existence』, it is impossible to obtain 『non-existence.』
Using the interpretation of principles as the teaching, if there is no such principle, how could these words be fabricated out of thin air?
What is the realm of the original 『existence』? It is that the five skandhas (五陰 – wǔyīn) are eternally extinguished. Investigating the realm of 『non-existence』, it is that the profound spirit will never be exhausted. If the profound spirit is not exhausted, then embracing the One will be clear and pure. If the five skandhas are eternally extinguished, then all burdens will be abandoned. If all burdens are abandoned, then one can be in harmony with the Dao (道 – Dào). If one embraces the One and is clear and pure, then it is wondrous without traces of effort. If it is wondrous without traces of effort, then the supreme function is ever-present. If one is in harmony with the Dao, then it is profound and unchangeable. If it is profound and unchangeable, then it cannot be considered 『existent』; if the supreme function is ever-present, then it cannot be considered 『non-existent.』
The first two sentences are a double negation of 『existence』 and 『non-existence』. The two kinds of suffering skandhas have already disappeared, so it is said that they are eternally extinguished. 『Non-existence』 is also not a place, but there are two different meanings of having boundaries and not having boundaries, so it is said to be 『鄉 (xiāng)』. The wonderful function of Prajna (般若 – Bōrě) is ever-present, so it is said that it will not be exhausted. Merging with the principle into one, so it is said to be 『embracing the One』. Delusions, karmic obstacles, and suffering are like dust and sand, so it is said that all burdens are abandoned, which is true liberation.
亦可五陰。永滅樂也。幽靈不竭我也。抱一湛然常也。萬累都捐凈也。與道通同者。三事四德無異體。故抱一下明體神而下顯用。無功者。即神而常湛故。常存者。雖曰無功。神應無息故。故涅槃經云。能建大義。后四句約體以明非有。就用以明非無。體用一源故。非有非無。若各說者。五陰滅故萬累捐。萬累捐故與道同。與道同故沖而不改。沖而不改。故不可為有。相躡釋成前本之有境等。已上約體用可例說。
然則有無絕於內。稱謂淪於外。視聽之所不暨(及)四空之所昏昧。恬焉而夷(平)怕然而泰(通)九流於是乎交歸。眾聖於是乎冥會 此亦躡前而起。初句絕二種相。次句離二種名。視聽下由非名相。故視聽不及。四空者。即四無色。昏昧者。謂涅槃非四空之定。若以此求之。則何能明瞭。故云昏昧。恬焉下覆成前義。何故爾耶。以其恬焉而夷等。九流有二。一云九地。一云治世九流。即道儒墨名等。眾聖三乘也意云。涅槃之道是九流所歸。眾聖所會。王成不二殊途而同歸。
斯乃希夷之境太玄之鄉。而欲以有無題榜標(指)其方域而語其神(妙)道者。不亦邈(遠)哉 涅槃之道非聲非色。豈可以有餘為有。無餘為無。依名榜示標指處。所謂王宮托質為有。雙林息跡為無。而說其妙道。豈不
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 亦可說五陰（色、受、想、行、識五種聚合）永遠滅盡，是為快樂。那幽深玄妙的靈性不會窮盡，這就是真我。抱守這唯一的真性，清澈明凈，永恒不變。萬般牽累都拋棄，達到清凈的境界。與「道」（宇宙的本源和規律）相通相同，三事（體、相、用）四德（常、樂、我、凈）沒有差別。所以說，抱守這唯一的真性，就能明白本體，神性由此顯現作用。所謂「無功」，就是神性本來就清澈明凈的緣故。所謂「常存」，雖然說是「無功」，但神性的應化沒有止息的緣故。所以《涅槃經》說，能夠建立偉大的意義。後面的四句是就本體來說明並非實有，就作用來說明並非虛無。本體和作用本是同一來源，所以說非有非無。如果分別來說，五陰滅盡，所以萬般牽累都拋棄；萬般牽累都拋棄，所以與「道」相同；與「道」相同，所以空虛而不可改變；空虛而不可改變，所以不可認為是實有。這些都是相互關聯，解釋說明前面所說的實有境界等等。以上是就本體和作用可以類比說明的。
如此說來，有和無的概念在內在已經超越，各種稱謂在外在也已經消失。視聽所不能及，四空定（空無邊處定、識無邊處定、無所有處定、非想非非想處定）也無法理解。恬靜而平坦，淡泊而通達，九流（指儒、道、墨等九個流派，或指九地）都在這裡交匯歸宿，眾聖（指三乘聖人，即聲聞、緣覺、菩薩）都在這裡默默領會。這也是承接前面的意思而展開。第一句是超越有和無兩種對立的相狀，第二句是脫離有和無兩種名稱。因為不是名相所能及，所以視聽無法達到。所謂「四空」，就是四無色定。所謂「昏昧」，是說涅槃不是四空之定。如果用四空之定來尋求涅槃，又怎麼能夠明白瞭解呢？所以說「昏昧」。「恬焉」以下又是重複前面的意思。為什麼這樣說呢？因為恬靜而平坦等等。所謂「九流」，有兩種解釋，一種是指九地，一種是指治理世事的九個流派，也就是道、儒、墨、名等等。所謂「眾聖」，是指三乘聖人。意思是說，涅槃的「道」是九流所歸宿的地方，是眾聖所會合的地方，雖然途徑不同，最終都歸於同一目標。
這實在是虛無縹緲的境界，深奧玄妙的家鄉。而想要用有和無來題寫標榜，指明它的方位區域，談論它的神妙之道，不是太荒謬了嗎？涅槃的「道」非聲非色，怎麼可以用有餘涅槃認為是「有」，用無餘涅槃認為是「無」，依據名相來標示指點處所呢？所謂在王宮託生可以認為是「有」，在雙林示現滅寂可以認為是「無」，而用這些來說明涅槃的神妙之道，難道不荒謬嗎？
【English Translation】 English version: One can also say that the five skandhas (form, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness) are eternally extinguished, and this is happiness. That profound and mysterious spirit will not be exhausted; this is the true self. Holding onto this unique true nature, clear and pure, eternally unchanging. Abandoning all entanglements, reaching a state of purity. Being in communion and identical with the 'Tao' (the origin and law of the universe), the three aspects (essence, form, function) and four virtues (permanence, bliss, self, purity) are without difference. Therefore, it is said that holding onto this unique true nature, one can understand the essence, and the divine nature manifests its function from this. The so-called 'without merit' is because the divine nature is originally clear and pure. The so-called 'eternally existing' is that although it is said to be 'without merit,' the transformations of the divine nature do not cease. Therefore, the Nirvana Sutra says that it can establish great meaning. The following four sentences explain that the essence is not truly existent, and the function is not truly non-existent. Essence and function are originally from the same source, so it is said to be neither existent nor non-existent. If explained separately, the five skandhas are extinguished, so all entanglements are abandoned; all entanglements are abandoned, so one is identical with the 'Tao'; being identical with the 'Tao,' one is empty and unchangeable; being empty and unchangeable, one cannot be considered truly existent. These are all interconnected, explaining the aforementioned realm of existence, and so on. The above can be explained by analogy in terms of essence and function.
Thus, the concepts of existence and non-existence have already been transcended internally, and all designations have disappeared externally. What sight and hearing cannot reach, and what the four samadhis of emptiness (the samadhi of the infinity of space, the samadhi of the infinity of consciousness, the samadhi of nothingness, and the samadhi of neither perception nor non-perception) cannot comprehend. Tranquil and peaceful, serene and unobstructed, the nine streams (referring to the nine schools of thought such as Confucianism, Taoism, Mohism, etc., or the nine realms of existence) converge and return here, and all the sages (referring to the three vehicles of arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas) silently understand here. This also expands upon the previous meaning. The first sentence transcends the two opposing aspects of existence and non-existence, and the second sentence detaches from the two names of existence and non-existence. Because it is beyond what names and forms can reach, sight and hearing cannot attain it. The so-called 'four emptinesses' are the four formless samadhis. The so-called 'obscurity' means that Nirvana is not the samadhi of the four emptinesses. If one seeks Nirvana with the samadhi of the four emptinesses, how can one understand it clearly? Therefore, it is said to be 'obscure.' The following 'tranquil' repeats the previous meaning. Why is this so? Because it is tranquil and peaceful, and so on. The so-called 'nine streams' have two explanations: one refers to the nine realms of existence, and the other refers to the nine schools of thought that govern the world, namely Taoism, Confucianism, Mohism, the School of Names, and so on. The so-called 'sages' refer to the three vehicles. The meaning is that the 'Tao' of Nirvana is the place where the nine streams return, and the place where the sages gather. Although the paths are different, they ultimately return to the same goal.
This is truly a realm of ethereal emptiness, a home of profound mystery. And to try to inscribe and label it with existence and non-existence, to point out its location and discuss its wondrous Tao, is it not absurd? The 'Tao' of Nirvana is neither sound nor form. How can one consider Nirvana with remainder as 'existent' and Nirvana without remainder as 'non-existent,' and use names and forms to indicate its location? To say that being born in the royal palace can be considered 'existent,' and showing extinction in the Sala Grove can be considered 'non-existent,' and to use these to explain the wondrous Tao of Nirvana, is it not absurd?
遠乎。以成前文應物之假名爾。
核體第二 九折之一也。核考覈也。因前說涅槃之體非有非無。故今折之。體竟何在。此假二乘有無之問。以破其執。
有名曰。夫名號不虛生。稱謂不自起 稱謂言說也。約義生名。因名起說。
經稱有餘涅槃無餘涅槃者。蓋是返本之真名神道之妙稱者也。請試陳(布張)之 返本無餘之名。神道有餘之號。謂隱現難測曰神。往來所游曰道。
有餘者。謂如來大覺始興。法身初建。澡八解之清流。憩七覺之茂林積萬善於曠劫。蕩無始之遺塵 三乘之人斷煩惱障。寂無喧擾謂之涅槃。有餘緣等未滅故名有餘。論意謂。正覺成佛積德斷障自利利他等。皆有餘樂也。如來者。乘如實道來成正覺。揀于分小之覺。故云大覺。戒等五分名為法身。依報而住。故此先後。八解者。因修八觀隨得解脫。即內有色等。此能凈惑喻澡清流。七覺者。謂念擇等覺分。佛已修圓如休息于茂林。上明果滿下明因圓。積萬下大小皆說三僧祇數六度萬行。然義復殊不繁具示。蕩無下明斷惑。樹下合斷。謂三十四心等。坌污凈智喻于塵也。
三明鏡于內神光照于外。結僧那於始心。終大悲以赴難 三明即知三世生死之智。在心明內鑒他為外。僧那梵音。此云弘誓。難者。謂生死界。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 遠嗎？這是爲了成就前文所說的應物而生的假名罷了。
核體第二，是九折之一。核，是考覈的意思。因為前面說了涅槃（Nirvana，佛教術語，指解脫生死輪迴的境界）的本體非有非無，所以現在剖析它。本體究竟在哪裡？這是假設二乘（Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna，聲聞乘和緣覺乘）的有無之問，來破除他們的執著。
有名（指提問者）說道：『名號不是憑空產生的，稱謂不是自己出現的。』稱謂，就是言說。根據意義產生名稱，因為名稱而開始言說。
經文中說有餘涅槃（Sa-upādisesa-nirvāna，指煩惱已斷，但身體還在的涅槃狀態）和無餘涅槃（An-upādisesa-nirvāna，指煩惱和身體都已滅盡的涅槃狀態），這大概是返本歸真的真實名稱，神妙莫測的稱謂啊。請嘗試陳述（布張）它。
返本，是無餘涅槃的名稱；神道，是有餘涅槃的稱號。所謂隱沒顯現難以預測叫做『神』，往來遊動的地方叫做『道』。
有餘涅槃，是指如來（Tathāgata，佛的稱號）大覺開始興起，法身（Dharmakāya，佛的法性之身）初步建立，在八解（八種解脫）的清澈流水中沐浴，在七覺（七種覺悟的因素）的茂盛樹林中休息，在漫長的劫數中積累萬善，滌盪無始以來的遺留塵埃。三乘（Triyāna，聲聞乘、緣覺乘和菩薩乘）之人斷除煩惱障，寂靜沒有喧擾叫做涅槃。因為還有剩餘的因緣沒有滅盡，所以叫做有餘。論的意義是說，正覺成佛，積累功德，斷除障礙，自利利他等等，都是有餘的快樂啊。如來，是乘著如實之道而來成就正覺，區別于片面的小覺，所以叫做大覺。戒等五分叫做法身，依靠果報而住，所以有先後順序。八解，是因為修習八種觀想而隨之得到的解脫，即內有色等，這能凈化迷惑，比喻為沐浴清流。七覺，是指念、擇等覺悟的因素，佛已經修習圓滿，如同在茂盛的樹林中休息。上面說明果的圓滿，下面說明因的圓滿。積累萬善以下，大小乘都說三大阿僧祇劫的數字，六度萬行。然而意義又不同，不詳細說明。滌盪無始以下，說明斷除迷惑。樹下總結斷除，指三十四心等。塵埃污染清凈的智慧，比喻為塵埃。
在內心擦亮三明（Trividya，宿命明、天眼明、漏盡明）之鏡，神光向外照耀。在最初發心時就結下僧那（Samvara，誓願）之約，最終以大悲心去赴救苦難。三明，就是了知三世生死之智慧。在內心明瞭，對外鑑察他人。僧那，是梵語音譯，這裡的意思是弘大的誓願。苦難，是指生死輪迴的境界。
【English Translation】 English version Is it far? It is merely to fulfill the provisional name that arises in response to things, as mentioned in the previous text.
The second section, 'Examining the Essence,' is one of the nine refutations. 'Examining' means to investigate and verify. Because it was previously stated that the essence of Nirvana (Nirvana, a Buddhist term referring to the state of liberation from the cycle of birth and death) is neither existent nor nonexistent, it is now being analyzed. Where exactly is the essence? This is a hypothetical question of existence and nonexistence from the Two Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna, the Hearer Vehicle and the Solitary Realizer Vehicle) to break their attachments.
Someone named (the questioner) said: 'Names are not born from emptiness, and appellations do not arise on their own.' Appellations are verbal expressions. Names arise based on meaning, and speech begins because of names.
The scriptures speak of Nirvana with Remainder (Sa-upādisesa-nirvāna, referring to the state of Nirvana where afflictions are extinguished but the body remains) and Nirvana without Remainder (An-upādisesa-nirvāna, referring to the state of Nirvana where both afflictions and the body are extinguished). These are likely the true names of returning to the origin and the wondrous appellations of the spiritual path. Please try to explain (spread out) it.
'Returning to the origin' is the name for Nirvana without Remainder; 'spiritual path' is the title for Nirvana with Remainder. That which is hidden and manifest, difficult to predict, is called 'spiritual'; the place where one travels back and forth is called 'path'.
Nirvana with Remainder refers to when the Tathāgata's (Tathāgata, an epithet of the Buddha) Great Enlightenment begins to arise, and the Dharmakāya (Dharmakāya, the body of the Buddha's Dharma nature) is initially established, bathing in the clear stream of the Eight Liberations (eight kinds of liberation), resting in the lush forest of the Seven Factors of Enlightenment (seven factors of awakening), accumulating myriad virtues over vast kalpas, and washing away the residual dust from beginningless time. Those of the Three Vehicles (Triyāna, the Hearer Vehicle, the Solitary Realizer Vehicle, and the Bodhisattva Vehicle) who sever the afflictive obscurations, and are peaceful without disturbance, are said to be in Nirvana. Because there are remaining conditions that have not been extinguished, it is called Nirvana with Remainder. The meaning of the treatise is that the Right Enlightenment of becoming a Buddha, accumulating merit, severing obstacles, benefiting oneself and others, etc., are all remaining joys. The Tathāgata is one who comes having ridden the path of suchness to accomplish Right Enlightenment, distinguishing it from partial, small enlightenment, hence it is called Great Enlightenment. The five divisions, such as precepts, are called the Dharmakāya, relying on the resultant reward to abide, hence there is this order. The Eight Liberations are the liberations attained by cultivating the eight contemplations, such as internal form, which can purify delusion, likened to bathing in a clear stream. The Seven Factors of Enlightenment refer to mindfulness, discernment, etc., the factors of awakening. The Buddha has already cultivated them to perfection, like resting in a lush forest. The above explains the perfection of the result, and the below explains the perfection of the cause. 'Accumulating myriad virtues' and below, both the Great and Small Vehicles speak of the number of three great asamkhyeya kalpas, the myriad practices of the six perfections. However, the meanings are different, and will not be explained in detail. 'Washing away from beginningless time' and below, explains severing delusion. The conclusion of severing below the tree refers to the thirty-four minds, etc. The defilement of dust contaminates pure wisdom, likened to dust.
Polish the mirror of the Three Knowledges (Trividya, knowledge of past lives, divine eye, and extinction of outflows) within, and the divine light shines outward. From the initial arising of the mind, make the vow of Samvara (Samvara, vows), and ultimately go to relieve suffering with great compassion. The Three Knowledges are the wisdom of knowing the birth and death of the three times. To be clear within the heart, and to discern others externally. Samvara is a transliteration of a Sanskrit word, here meaning great vows. Suffering refers to the realm of birth and death.
以如來初心結誓盡度生界。故成佛已酬愿利生。
仰攀玄根俯提弱喪。超邁(出)三域獨蹈(踐)大方。啟八正之平路坦(平)眾庶之夷途。騁六通之神驥。乘五衍之安車 此顯利生之儀。仰向上也。俯就下也。玄根喻理。弱喪者。弱而失國。喻背覺合塵。此意如人救溺上攀于樹。下拯溺者則身不陷。如來亦爾。本智照真后智救物。生死不縛。次二句明超。三域即三界。界外名為大方。亦二空之理也。佛獨踐之。以小教說唯悉達一人具遍覺性。故八正者。謂正見正思等。眾庶者。庶謂庶孽即異見外道。謂大開八正以坦諸邪。邪徑不平由坦而夷故。騁謂馳騁。駿馬曰驥。神通化物應機敏速。故喻神驥梵云衍那。此云乘。即五乘之法。謂戒善諦緣六度等。安車者。云庵云。三乘出三界人天出三途。故云安也。化儀大況。啟正摧邪運通說法。
至於出生入死與物推移。道無不洽(沾)德(恩)無不施。窮化母之始物。極玄樞之妙用 初二句明隨機宜生則出宜滅則入。但益物是懷推移何定。意兼隨類之化。次二句明化博。謂八正等布三界俱沾。五衍齊運群機皆濟。化母下道書以氣為化母。云庵云。因緣能生諸法。如化母也。玄樞喻智。門樞運轉。喻后智應動。然此上句舉化境。下句明化智。謂窮盡因緣生物之理。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 以如來最初的本願，立下誓言要盡力救度一切眾生。所以成佛之後，便實踐誓願利益眾生。
向上攀援真理的根本，向下提攜弱小迷失的眾生。超越三界，獨自踐行大道。開啟八正道的平坦道路，平整眾生的崎嶇之路。馳騁六神通的駿馬，乘坐五乘法的安穩車乘——這顯示了佛陀利益眾生的儀態。『仰』是向上，『俯』是向下。『玄根』比喻真理，『弱喪』指弱小而失去依靠，比喻背離覺悟而與塵世相合。這個意思就像有人救助溺水者，向上攀援樹木，向下拯救溺水者，自身才不會陷落。如來也是這樣，根本智照見真理，后得智救度眾生，便不會被生死所束縛。接下來的兩句說明佛陀的超脫。『三域』就是三界，界外稱為『大方』，也指二空的真理。佛陀獨自踐行它，因為小乘教義說只有悉達多一人具備普遍的覺悟之性。『八正』指正見、正思等。『眾庶』，『庶』指庶民，即持有不同見解的外道。意思是廣泛開啟八正道，來平整各種邪路。邪路不平坦，經過平整就變得平坦了。『騁』是馳騁的意思。駿馬稱為『驥』。神通化物，應機敏捷迅速，所以比喻為神驥。梵語『衍那』（Yana），這裡翻譯為『乘』，即五乘之法，指戒、善、諦、緣、六度等。『安車』，云庵（Yun An）說，三乘能使眾生脫離三界，人天乘能使眾生脫離三惡道，所以稱為『安』。這是佛陀教化眾生的宏大景象，開啟正道，摧毀邪惡，運用神通，宣說佛法。
至於出生入死，與萬物一同變化。佛道無處不遍及，恩德無處不施予。窮盡化生的本源，發揮玄妙樞機的妙用——前面的兩句說明佛陀隨機應化，眾生應該出生就出生，應該滅度就滅度。只要對眾生有益，佛陀便心懷慈悲，隨著眾生的類別而變化。後面的兩句說明佛陀的教化廣博。八正道等遍佈三界，使眾生都得到利益。五乘法同時執行，各種根器的眾生都得到救濟。『化母』，道家典籍以氣為化母。云庵（Yun An）說，因緣能夠產生諸法，就像化母一樣。『玄樞』比喻智慧。門樞運轉，比喻后得智應機而動。然而，上面的句子是舉出化生的境界，下面的句子是說明化生的智慧，意思是窮盡因緣產生萬物的道理。
【English Translation】 English version With the initial vow of the Tathagata (如來, another name for Buddha, meaning 'Thus Gone' or 'Thus Come'), he pledged to exhaustively liberate all sentient beings. Therefore, after attaining Buddhahood, he fulfills his vows to benefit sentient beings.
Reaching upward to grasp the profound root (玄根, profound root, referring to the fundamental truth), and bending down to lift up the weak and lost (弱喪, weak and lost, referring to those who are weak and have lost their way). Surpassing the Three Realms (三域, Three Realms: desire realm, form realm, and formless realm), he alone treads the Great Way (大方, Great Way, referring to the path beyond the Three Realms). Opening the level path of the Eightfold Path (八正, Eightfold Path: Right View, Right Thought, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration), smoothing the rugged path for all beings. Riding the divine steed of the Six Supernatural Powers (六通, Six Supernatural Powers: divine eye, divine ear, knowledge of others' minds, remembrance of past lives, magical powers, and extinction of defilements), and mounting the safe chariot of the Five Vehicles (五衍, Five Vehicles: the vehicles of humans, devas, sravakas, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas) – this reveals the demeanor of benefiting sentient beings. 'Reaching upward' signifies looking up, and 'bending down' signifies looking down. 'Profound root' is a metaphor for truth, and 'weak and lost' refers to being weak and losing one's way, a metaphor for turning away from enlightenment and conforming to the dust of the world. This idea is like a person rescuing a drowning person, climbing up a tree to grasp it, and lowering themselves to save the drowning person so that they themselves do not sink. The Tathagata is also like this: fundamental wisdom illuminates the truth, and subsequent wisdom saves beings, so they are not bound by birth and death. The next two sentences explain transcendence. 'Three Realms' are the Three Realms, and beyond the realms is called 'Great Way', which also refers to the truth of the two emptinesses. The Buddha alone treads it, because the Hinayana teachings say that only Siddhartha possesses universal enlightenment. 'Eightfold Path' refers to Right View, Right Thought, etc. 'All beings', 'all' refers to common people, that is, heretics with different views. It means widely opening the Eightfold Path to smooth out all the evil paths. The evil paths are not smooth, but become smooth after being leveled. 'Riding' means galloping. A fine horse is called a 'steed'. Supernatural powers transform beings, responding to opportunities quickly and swiftly, so it is likened to a divine steed. 'Yana' (衍那) in Sanskrit, here translated as 'vehicle', is the method of the Five Vehicles, referring to precepts, goodness, truth, conditions, the Six Perfections, etc. 'Safe chariot', Yun An (云庵) said, the Three Vehicles can liberate beings from the Three Realms, and the human and deva vehicles can liberate beings from the three evil paths, so it is called 'safe'. This is a grand scene of the Buddha's teachings, opening the right path, destroying evil, using supernatural powers, and expounding the Dharma.
As for being born and entering death, moving and changing with all things, the Buddha's path pervades everywhere, and his grace is bestowed everywhere. Exhausting the origin of transformation, and fully utilizing the wondrous function of the mysterious pivot – the first two sentences explain the Buddha's adaptation to circumstances, being born when beings should be born, and entering extinction when they should enter extinction. As long as it benefits beings, the Buddha cherishes compassion and changes with the categories of beings. The next two sentences explain the breadth of the Buddha's teachings. The Eightfold Path and others pervade the Three Realms, so that all beings receive benefits. The Five Vehicles operate simultaneously, and all beings with various capacities are saved. 'Transformation mother', Taoist texts regard qi as the transformation mother. Yun An (云庵) said, conditions can produce all dharmas, just like the transformation mother. 'Mysterious pivot' is a metaphor for wisdom. The door pivot rotates, a metaphor for subsequent wisdom responding to opportunities. However, the above sentence cites the realm of transformation, and the sentence below explains the wisdom of transformation, meaning exhausting the principle of conditions producing all things.
極其智用。說因緣生滅之教。知可度者度之。不可度者存之。又知宜大宜小等。由斯而知所以極智妙神用而化矣。
廓(靜)虛宇于無疆。耀薩云以幽燭。將絕眹於九止。永淪太虛 初句所證。次句能證。梵語。薩云若。此云一切智。謂騰耀智光深照前理。眹微兆也。九止九地也。太虛無餘也。欲結有餘之名。先舉證理入寂。詳此折意。謂如來本欲淪虛。但余緣不盡居有餘。
而有餘緣不盡。余跡不泯。業報猶魂聖智尚存。此有餘涅槃也 通有四事。一余緣即度余之機。二餘跡即所依之身。三餘業即感報之業猶有魂氣。四聖智未滅皆有餘也。
經曰。陶冶塵滓如煉真金。萬累都盡而靈覺獨存 初二句喻說塵如萬累。金如靈覺礦穢去而真金現。萬累盡而靈覺存。陶謂陶汰。冶镕冶。
無餘者。謂至人教緣都訖。靈照永滅廓爾無眹故曰無餘 緣跡既了。業智兼亡。皆無所餘。
何則(徴)夫大患莫若於有身。故滅身以歸無。勞勤莫先於有智。故絕智以淪虛 文有二對。皆初句舉患。后句欣寂。初身後智如文可了。老氏云。吾有大患為吾有身。
然則智以(因)形倦形以智勞。輪轉修(長)途疲而弗已 欲養其形智慮籌畫。是智因形而疲倦。智既籌慮。反使其身晝夜勞作。是形因智而
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 極其善於運用智慧。宣說因緣生滅的教義。知道可以度化的人就度化他們，不可度化的人就隨他們去。又知道（眾生）適合接受大乘教法還是小乘教法等等。由此可知，（佛）之所以能極盡智慧，運用奇妙的神通來教化眾生了。 在無邊無際的寂靜虛空中，（佛的）智慧之光如同薩云（Sarvajna，一切智）一般照亮幽暗之處。將要斷絕在九地（指修行的九個階段）中的所有聯繫，永遠沉淪於太虛之中——第一句是所證得的境界，第二句是能證得這種境界的智慧。梵語「薩云若」（Sarvajna），這裡翻譯為「一切智」，指的是騰耀的智慧之光深刻地照亮了前面的道理。「眹」是微小的跡象。「九止」是九地。「太虛」是沒有剩餘的狀態。想要總結有餘涅槃的名稱，先舉出證得真理而入寂滅的例子，詳細說明其中的含義。意思是說，如來本來想要沉淪於虛無之中，但因為剩餘的因緣沒有完結，所以停留在有餘涅槃的狀態。 而有餘的因緣沒有完結，剩餘的痕跡沒有泯滅，業報的魂氣依然存在，聖人的智慧仍然存在。這就是有餘涅槃。（有餘涅槃）通常有四件事：一是剩餘的因緣，即度化剩餘眾生的機會；二是剩餘的痕跡，即所依靠的身體；三是剩餘的業，即感受果報的業力，仍然有魂氣；四是聖人的智慧沒有滅盡，這些都是有餘的。 經書上說：『陶冶塵土雜質，就像煉製真金一樣。』所有的牽累都消失了，而靈明的覺性獨自存在。』前兩句用比喻來說明，塵土雜質就像是各種牽累，真金就像是靈明的覺性，礦石中的雜質去除后，真金就顯現出來；各種牽累都消失後，靈明的覺性就存在了。「陶」是陶汰，「冶」是镕冶。 無餘涅槃指的是，至人的教化因緣全部結束，靈明的照耀永遠熄滅，空曠寂靜沒有絲毫痕跡，所以叫做無餘涅槃。因緣和痕跡既然已經了結，業力和智慧也一併消失，都沒有剩餘。 為什麼這樣說呢？（提出疑問）最大的禍患莫過於有身體，所以要滅除身體以歸於無。最勞苦的事情莫過於有智慧，所以要斷絕智慧以沉淪於虛無。這段文字有兩組對比。都是第一句提出禍患，后一句欣慕寂滅。身體和智慧的禍患，如文字所說的那樣可以明白。老子說：『我最大的禍患就是因為我有身體。』 既然這樣，那麼智慧因為形體的存在而疲倦，形體因為智慧的運用而勞累，像車輪一樣不停地運轉，在漫長的道路上疲憊不堪而不能停止。想要保養形體，就要用智慧來籌劃；智慧既然籌劃，反而使身體日夜勞作。這是形體因為智慧而勞累。
【English Translation】 English version: Extremely skilled in the application of wisdom. Explains the teachings of the arising and ceasing of conditions. Knows those who can be delivered and delivers them; those who cannot be delivered are left as they are. Also knows whether (beings) are suitable for the Mahayana or Hinayana teachings, and so on. From this, it can be known that (the Buddha) is able to fully utilize wisdom and employ wondrous spiritual powers to transform beings. In the boundless and silent void, (the Buddha's) light of wisdom shines like Sarvajna (all-knowing) illuminating the darkness. About to sever all connections in the nine grounds (referring to the nine stages of practice), eternally sinking into the great void—the first sentence is the state attained, the second sentence is the wisdom that can attain this state. The Sanskrit word 'Sarvajna' is translated here as 'all-knowing,' referring to the radiant light of wisdom that deeply illuminates the preceding principle. '朕 (zhèn)' means subtle signs. 'Nine grounds' are the nine stages. 'Great void' is the state of no remainder. Wanting to summarize the name of Nirvana with remainder, first give an example of attaining truth and entering stillness, explaining the meaning in detail. It means that the Tathagata originally wanted to sink into emptiness, but because the remaining conditions were not exhausted, he remained in the state of Nirvana with remainder. And the remaining conditions are not exhausted, the remaining traces are not extinguished, the karmic retribution of the soul still exists, and the wisdom of the sage still exists. This is Nirvana with remainder. (Nirvana with remainder) usually has four things: one is the remaining conditions, that is, the opportunity to deliver the remaining beings; two is the remaining traces, that is, the body on which it depends; three is the remaining karma, that is, the karma of feeling retribution, still having a soul; four is the wisdom of the sage not being extinguished, these are all remaining. The scriptures say: 'Refining dust and impurities is like refining true gold.' All entanglements disappear, and the bright awareness alone remains. 'The first two sentences use a metaphor to explain that dust and impurities are like various entanglements, and true gold is like bright awareness. After the impurities in the ore are removed, the true gold appears; after all entanglements disappear, the bright awareness remains. '陶 (táo)' means to eliminate, '冶 (yě)' means to smelt. Nirvana without remainder refers to the fact that the teaching conditions of the perfect person are all over, the bright illumination is extinguished forever, and the vast silence has no trace, so it is called Nirvana without remainder. Since the conditions and traces have been concluded, karma and wisdom also disappear together, and there is nothing left. Why is this so? (Asking a question) The greatest misfortune is having a body, so one must destroy the body to return to nothingness. The most laborious thing is having wisdom, so one must cut off wisdom to sink into emptiness. This passage has two sets of contrasts. Both the first sentence raises the misfortune, and the second sentence admires stillness. The misfortune of body and wisdom can be understood as the text says. Lao Tzu said: 'My greatest misfortune is because I have a body.' In that case, wisdom is tired because of the existence of the body, and the body is tired because of the use of wisdom, like a wheel turning non-stop, exhausted on the long road and unable to stop. If you want to maintain the body, you must use wisdom to plan; since wisdom plans, it makes the body work day and night. This is the body being tired because of wisdom.
勞。因此相役於生死長途。如輪運轉雖疲弗止。
經云。智為雜毒形如桎梏。淵默以之而遼(遠)患難以之而起 智慮不一故云雜。毒如世毒藥。能損命故。桎梏刑器。械足曰桎。械手曰梏。桎梏禁人。人實厭之。形能患人。厭亦應爾。淵默下示過。淵默謂無餘。身智兼存而有二過。一遠於無餘。二生於勞患。
所以至人灰身滅智捐形絕慮。內無機照之勤外息大患之本。超然與群有永分。混爾與太虛同體。寂焉無聞。怕焉無兆。冥冥長往莫知所之(往) 至人謂如來。體質名身。容儀為形。灰身乃捐其形患。智即心體慮即心用。滅智乃絕其思慮。次二句釋成無患。超群下六句明益。一超群有離生滅相。二同太虛顯無為益。三非聲非色。四究竟不退。
其猶燈盡火滅膏明俱竭。此無餘涅槃也 燈火喻身智。膏明喻形慮。
經云。五陰永盡。譬如燈滅 五陰身心通體。
然則有餘可以有稱。無餘可以無名。無名立則宗虛者。欣尚于沖默。有稱生則懷德者。彌仰于聖功。斯乃典誥之所垂文。先聖之所軌轍 初二句謂有斯二理。可立二名。次二句正彰所益。宗虛謂二乘小機性本好滅。依名求實而入無餘。懷德謂六度大人。性好立德。依名求實而仰有餘。后之二句。一聖教定量故。二先聖軌轍故
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：因此相互役使，在生死輪迴的漫長道路上奔波。就像車輪運轉一樣，即使疲憊也不停止。
經書上說：『智慧如同摻雜毒藥，形狀如同刑具。』深沉的寂默因此而遠離（解脫），憂患艱難也因此而產生。智慧思慮不統一，所以說是『雜』。毒藥如同世間的毒藥，能夠損害生命。刑具是禁錮人的刑具，械住腳的叫『桎』，械住手的叫『梏』。刑具禁錮人，人實在厭惡它。形狀能夠使人產生憂患，厭惡它也是應該的。『淵默』下面揭示過失。『淵默』指的是無餘。身和智慧同時存在，就會產生兩種過失：一是遠離無餘涅槃，二是產生勞累和憂患。
所以達到最高境界的人，灰滅身軀和智慧，拋棄形體，斷絕思慮。內心沒有機巧的照察，外在止息重大憂患的根本。超脫于眾生，永遠分離。混同于太虛，與它成為一體。寂靜無聲，沒有絲毫跡象。在冥冥之中長久地逝去，沒有人知道他去了哪裡。
達到最高境界的人指的是如來（Tathagata）。身體的實質叫做『身』，容貌儀態叫做『形』。灰滅身軀就是拋棄形體的憂患。智慧就是心的本體，思慮就是心的作用。滅絕智慧就是斷絕思慮。接下來的兩句解釋成就無患。超脫眾生以下的六句說明利益：一是超脫眾生，遠離生滅的現象；二是混同太虛，彰顯無為的利益；三是非聲非色；四是究竟不退轉。
這就好比燈油耗盡，火焰熄滅，燈油和光明都已枯竭。這就是無餘涅槃（nirvana）。
經書上說：『五陰（skandha）永遠滅盡，就像燈火熄滅一樣。』五陰是身心通體的總稱。
如此說來，有餘涅槃可以有所稱說，無餘涅槃可以沒有名稱。沒有名稱確立，那麼崇尚虛無的人，就會欣喜于空寂和寂默。有了名稱產生，那麼懷有德行的人，就會更加仰慕聖人的功德。這正是典籍訓誥所垂示的文辭，先聖所遵循的軌跡。
最初的兩句說的是有這兩種道理，可以建立兩種名稱。接下來的兩句正是彰顯所獲得的利益。崇尚虛無指的是二乘（two vehicles）的小乘根機，本性喜好滅盡，依靠名稱來尋求實際而進入無餘涅槃。懷有德行指的是修持六度（six paramitas）的大乘之人，本性喜好建立功德，依靠名稱來尋求實際而仰慕有餘涅槃。後面的兩句，一是聖人的教誨是確定的，二是先聖所遵循的軌跡。
【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, they are mutually enslaved, toiling on the long road of birth and death. Like a wheel turning, they do not stop even when exhausted.
The sutra says: 'Wisdom is like a mixture of poison, its form like shackles.' Profound silence is thus distanced (from liberation), and worries and difficulties arise from it. Wisdom and thoughts are not unified, so it is called 'mixed'. Poison is like the poison in the world, capable of harming life. Shackles are instruments of restraint, those that bind the feet are called 'shackles' (zhì), and those that bind the hands are called 'cuffs' (gù). Shackles restrain people, and people truly detest them. Form can cause people to worry, and detesting it is also appropriate. 'Profound silence' below reveals the faults. 'Profound silence' refers to no remainder. When both body and wisdom exist, two faults arise: first, being distant from nirvana without remainder, and second, generating toil and worry.
Therefore, those who reach the highest state extinguish their bodies and wisdom, abandon their forms, and sever their thoughts. Their inner minds have no cunning observation, and their outer selves cease the root of great worries. They transcend the masses, forever separated. They merge with the great void, becoming one with it. Silent and without sound, without the slightest trace. In the darkness, they depart forever, and no one knows where they have gone.
Those who reach the highest state refer to the Tathagata (Tathagata). The substance of the body is called 'body', and the appearance and demeanor are called 'form'. Extinguishing the body is abandoning the worries of form. Wisdom is the essence of the mind, and thoughts are the function of the mind. Extinguishing wisdom is severing thoughts. The following two sentences explain the achievement of no worry. The six sentences from transcending the masses onwards explain the benefits: first, transcending the masses and being separated from the phenomena of birth and death; second, merging with the great void and manifesting the benefit of non-action; third, being neither sound nor form; fourth, ultimately not regressing.
It is like a lamp whose oil is exhausted, its flame extinguished, and its oil and light are depleted. This is nirvana without remainder (nirvana).
The sutra says: 'The five skandhas (skandha) are forever extinguished, like a lamp whose flame is extinguished.' The five skandhas are the general term for the entirety of body and mind.
Thus, nirvana with remainder can be spoken of, and nirvana without remainder can have no name. When no name is established, then those who revere emptiness will rejoice in emptiness and silence. When a name arises, then those who cherish virtue will admire the merits of the sages even more. This is precisely the wording that the classics and instructions have handed down, and the path that the ancient sages have followed.
The first two sentences say that there are these two principles, and two names can be established. The next two sentences precisely reveal the benefits obtained. Reverence for emptiness refers to the small vehicle (two vehicles) of the two vehicles, whose nature is fond of extinction, relying on names to seek reality and enter nirvana without remainder. Cherishing virtue refers to the great vehicle practitioners who cultivate the six paramitas (six paramitas), whose nature is fond of establishing merit, relying on names to seek reality and admire nirvana with remainder. The last two sentences, first, the teachings of the sages are certain, and second, the path followed by the ancient sages.
。
而曰。有無絕於內稱謂淪於外。視聽之所不暨。四空之所昏昧。使夫懷德者自絕。宗虛者靡托 初四句引前違文。后二句顯失二機。
無異杜耳目于胎㲉(卵)掩玄(夫)象于霄外。而責夫宮商之異。辨緇素之殊者也 玄象天上星彩。霄謂霄漢。宮商五音之二。合舉二喻。以喻外亡名相內絕有無。二喻影略。具云掩玄。像于霄外。閟琴瑟于堂中。卻責盲瞆之徒。令辨玄象黑白之殊。琴聲宮商之異。何由能之。法中意云。記憶體有無。外存稱謂。猶恐不入。今內外雙絕。何以寄懷而悟入。
子徒知遠推至人于有無之表。高韻絕唱于形名之外。而論旨竟莫知所歸。幽途故自蘊而未顯。靜思幽尋寄懷無所 初二句舉得。而論下顯失。至人者。即涅槃也。出現疏云。雖明現身即涅槃用大。有無下謂雙絕名相。幽途者。幽深途徑。謂無名相而引物。物不能造。是自蘊藏。靜思下即有名者。尋思無所措懷。
豈所謂朗大明于冥室。奏玄響于無聞者哉 大明日也。謂若名相雙絕。不應根宜。不可謂之明杲日于暗室。令見其相奏妙音于未聞。使聽其玄。皆約名相以難。
位體第三 十演之二也。位猶安也。亦立也。因有名核體寄懷無所。故今位之。
無名曰。有餘無餘者。蓋是涅槃之外稱。應
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
然後（對方）說：『有』和『無』在內心完全斷絕，名稱和稱謂在外部消失殆盡，視力和聽力都無法到達的地方，甚至連空無的四空定境也無法照見的昏昧之處，這使得那些心懷美德的人自我斷絕，那些尊崇虛無的人無所寄託。』 前四句引用之前的違背經文之處，后兩句顯示喪失了兩種契機。 這就像把人的耳目封閉在胎胞之中，把天上的星象遮蔽在霄漢之外，卻責備他們分辨宮音和商音的差異，辨別緇衣和素衣的不同一樣。』 玄象指天上的星彩，霄指霄漢。宮商是五音中的兩種。這裡用兩個比喻，來比喻外在捨棄名相，內在斷絕『有』和『無』。兩個比喻只是略微提及，完整地說就是遮蔽天上的星象于霄漢之外，把琴瑟藏在堂屋之中，卻責備盲人和耳聾的人，讓他們辨別星象的顏色和黑白的差異，分辨琴聲的宮音和商音的不同，這怎麼可能做到呢？佛法中的意思是說，內心存在『有』和『無』，外在存在名稱和稱謂，還恐怕不能領悟，現在內外都斷絕了，用什麼來寄託心懷而悟入呢？ 你只是知道遠遠地推崇至人在『有』和『無』之外，高妙的韻致和絕妙的歌唱在形體和名稱之外，然而議論的宗旨最終也不知道歸向何處，幽深的途徑本來就是蘊藏著而沒有顯現出來，靜心思索，幽深地尋覓，（卻）無處可以寄託心懷。』 前兩句是讚揚，而『論』字以下則顯示了缺失。至人，就是涅槃。出現疏中說：『雖然明白現身就是涅槃的大用。』『有』和『無』以下指的是雙重斷絕名相。幽途，指的是幽深的途徑，指沒有名相而引導眾生，眾生卻不能領會，這就是自我蘊藏。『靜思』以下指的是有名相的人，尋思卻無處可以寄託心懷。 這難道不是所謂的在黑暗的房間里點亮太陽，在寂靜無聲的地方演奏玄妙的樂聲嗎？』 大明指太陽。這是說如果名相雙重斷絕，就不應適應根機，不能說是在黑暗的房間里點亮太陽，讓人看見它的形象，在沒有聲音的地方演奏美妙的音樂，使人聽見它的玄妙，這些都是用名相來責難。 位體第三 這是十演之二。位，就像安立，也就是建立。因為有名相可以覈實本體，（否則）寄託心懷無處，所以現在安立它。 無名（菩薩）說：『有餘涅槃和無餘涅槃，大概是涅槃之外的稱謂，應該……』
【English Translation】 English version:
Then (the other party) said: 'The 'being' and 'non-being' are completely cut off within, and the names and appellations disappear completely outside. The places where sight and hearing cannot reach, even the darkness that the four formless realms cannot illuminate, this makes those who cherish virtue cut themselves off, and those who venerate emptiness have nothing to rely on.' The first four sentences quote the previous violations of the scriptures, and the last two sentences show the loss of the two opportunities. This is like closing a person's ears and eyes in the womb, obscuring the celestial phenomena in the outer sky, but blaming them for distinguishing the differences between the 'gong' (宮) and 'shang' (商) tones, and distinguishing the differences between black (緇) and white (素) robes.' 'Xuanxiang' (玄象) refers to celestial phenomena, and 'xiaohan' (霄漢) refers to the outer sky. 'Gong' (宮) and 'shang' (商) are two of the five tones. Here, two metaphors are used to compare the external abandonment of names and forms, and the internal severance of 'being' and 'non-being'. The two metaphors are only briefly mentioned. To put it completely, it is to obscure the celestial phenomena outside the sky, hide the zither in the hall, but blame the blind and deaf people, asking them to distinguish the colors of the celestial phenomena and the differences between black and white, and to distinguish the differences between the 'gong' (宮) and 'shang' (商) tones of the zither. How can this be done? The meaning in the Dharma is that if 'being' and 'non-being' exist in the heart, and names and appellations exist externally, it is still feared that one cannot comprehend. Now that both inside and outside are cut off, what can be used to entrust one's heart and enter into enlightenment? You only know to remotely admire the perfect man beyond 'being' and 'non-being', and the sublime charm and exquisite singing beyond form and name, but the purpose of the discussion ultimately does not know where to go. The deep path is originally hidden and not revealed, and quiet contemplation and deep searching (but) have nowhere to entrust one's heart.' The first two sentences are praise, while the word 'discussion' (論) below shows the deficiency. The perfect man is Nirvana. The commentary on 'Emergence' says: 'Although it is clear that the manifestation of the body is the great function of Nirvana.' 'Being' and 'non-being' below refer to the double severance of names and forms. 'You Tu' (幽途) refers to the deep path, referring to the guidance of sentient beings without names and forms, but sentient beings cannot comprehend, which is self-concealment. 'Quiet contemplation' (靜思) below refers to people with names and forms, but there is nowhere to entrust their hearts in contemplation. Isn't this what is called lighting the sun in a dark room, and playing mysterious music in a silent place?' 'Daming' (大明) refers to the sun. This means that if names and forms are doubly severed, it should not adapt to the faculties, and it cannot be said that the sun is lit in a dark room to allow people to see its image, and that beautiful music is played in a place where there is no sound to allow people to hear its mystery. These are all criticisms using names and forms. Position and Substance (位體) Third This is the second of the ten evolutions. 'Wei' (位), is like establishing, that is, establishing. Because there are names and forms to verify the substance, (otherwise) there is nowhere to entrust the heart, so now establish it. 'Nameless' (無名) Bodhisattva said: 'Nirvana with remainder and Nirvana without remainder are probably names outside of Nirvana, and should...'
物之假名耳 外稱亦強名也。
而存稱謂者。封名。志器象者耽形 由言封名志器耽象。所以雙亡。楞伽云。名相常相隨而生於妄想。
名也極于題目。形也盡于方圓。方圓有所不像。題目有所不傳。焉可以名于無名。而形於無形者哉 初二句彰名相所盡。世間物象非方則圓。次二句正明妙體。非像故方圓何能像。非名故題目何所傳。大鈔像是寫字。后二句正顯不可。名但名于可名。像但象于可像。無名無象之體。焉可強名強象哉。題云涅槃無名。
難序云。有餘無餘者。信是權寂致(立)教之本意。亦是如來隱顯之誠跡也 初句牒前名家敘有餘無餘之文。信是下縱是權宜。縱有二意。一權寂是無餘。隨宜方便。故云權也。立教是有餘。皆如來化生之本意。二隱顯之實跡。隱為無餘。顯為有餘。
但未是玄寂絕言之幽致。又非至人環中之妙術(道)耳 奪也。前是權寂立教之意。未是玄寂絕言之致。無相故玄。無名故寂。前是隱顯之跡。亦非環中之妙。環中之妙豈容隱顯。
子徒不聞正觀之說歟。維摩詰言。我觀如來無始無終。六入已過三界已出。不在方不離方。非有為非無為。不可以識識。不可以智知。無言無說心行處滅。以此觀者乃名正觀。以他觀者非見佛也。放光云。佛如虛空
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：事物只是一個虛假的名字罷了，外在的稱呼也只是勉強安上的名稱。
而儲存這些稱謂的原因是：爲了封立名稱。執著于器物的形象是因為貪戀其外形。由於言語封立名稱，執著于器物貪戀形象，所以兩者都應該捨棄。《楞伽經》說：『名相常常相隨而生於妄想。』（Lanka: 《楞伽經》）
名稱的極限在於題目，形象的終點在於方形和圓形。方形和圓形有所不能描繪的，題目有所不能傳達的。怎麼可以用名稱來稱呼那沒有名稱的，用形象來描繪那沒有形象的呢？開頭兩句彰顯名稱和形象的侷限。世間的物象不是方的就是圓的。接下來的兩句正是說明妙體的。不是形象，所以方形和圓形怎麼能描繪它？不是名稱，所以題目又能傳達什麼？《大鈔》中說『象』是寫字。最後兩句正是顯示這種做法是不可行的。名稱只能稱呼可以稱呼的，形象只能描繪可以描繪的。對於那無名無象的本體，怎麼可以勉強安上名稱和形象呢？題目說的是《涅槃經》（Nirvana Sutra）的無名。
《難序》中說：『有餘涅槃（Nirvana with remainder）和無餘涅槃（Nirvana without remainder），確實是權巧寂滅（provisional extinction）和建立教法的根本用意，也是如來（Tathagata）隱沒和顯現的真實軌跡。』開頭一句引用了前文名家敘述有餘涅槃和無餘涅槃的文字。『確實是』以下，縱然是權宜之計。縱然有兩種含義：一是權巧寂滅是無餘涅槃，隨順適宜的方便，所以說是『權』。建立教法是有餘涅槃，都是如來化生的根本用意。二是隱沒和顯現的真實軌跡。隱沒是無餘涅槃，顯現是有餘涅槃。
但這還不是玄妙寂靜、斷絕言語的深遠意境，也不是至人（perfected person）環中（center of the circle）的精妙方法啊！這是否定。前面所說是權巧寂滅建立教法的用意，還不是玄妙寂靜、斷絕言語的意境。沒有相所以玄妙，沒有名稱所以寂靜。前面所說是隱沒和顯現的軌跡，也不是環中的精妙方法。環中的精妙方法怎麼能容許隱沒和顯現呢？
你難道沒有聽過正觀（right contemplation）的說法嗎？維摩詰（Vimalakirti）說：『我觀察如來無始無終，六入（six entrances）已經過去，三界（three realms）已經超出，不在方內也不離方外，不是有為法（conditioned dharma）也不是無為法（unconditioned dharma），不可以意識來認識，不可以智慧來了解，沒有言語沒有述說，心行之處滅盡。用這種方式來觀察才叫做正觀，用其他方式來觀察就不是見到佛。』《放光經》（Fangguang Jing）說：『佛如虛空。』
【English Translation】 English version: Things are merely false names; external designations are also just forced appellations.
The reason for preserving these designations is to establish names. Attachment to the form of objects is due to craving for their appearance. Because language establishes names and attachment to objects craves appearances, both should be abandoned. The Lanka (Lankavatara Sutra) says: 'Names and forms constantly arise together from delusion.'
The limit of names lies in titles, and the end of forms lies in squares and circles. Squares and circles cannot fully depict, and titles cannot fully convey. How can one use names to name the nameless, and forms to depict the formless? The first two sentences highlight the limitations of names and forms. Worldly objects are either square or round. The next two sentences precisely explain the wondrous essence. It is not form, so how can squares and circles depict it? It is not name, so what can titles convey? The Dachao says that 'form' is writing. The last two sentences precisely show that this practice is not feasible. Names can only name what can be named, and forms can only depict what can be depicted. How can one forcibly attach names and forms to the nameless and formless essence? The title refers to the namelessness of the Nirvana Sutra.
The Preface to Difficulties says: 'Nirvana with remainder and Nirvana without remainder are indeed the fundamental intention of expedient extinction and the establishment of teachings, and also the true traces of the Tathagata's concealment and manifestation.' The first sentence quotes the previous text of the masters narrating Nirvana with remainder and Nirvana without remainder. 'Indeed' below, even if it is expedient. 'Even if' has two meanings: first, expedient extinction is Nirvana without remainder, a convenient means that accords with the situation, so it is called 'expedient.' Establishing teachings is Nirvana with remainder, all of which is the fundamental intention of the Tathagata's transformation. Second, the true traces of concealment and manifestation. Concealment is Nirvana without remainder, and manifestation is Nirvana with remainder.
But this is not yet the profound essence of mysterious stillness and the cessation of speech, nor is it the subtle method of the perfected person in the center of the circle! This is negation. What was said earlier was the intention of expedient extinction and the establishment of teachings, but it is not yet the essence of mysterious stillness and the cessation of speech. It is mysterious because it has no form, and it is still because it has no name. What was said earlier was the traces of concealment and manifestation, but it is not the subtle method of the center of the circle. How can the subtle method of the center of the circle allow concealment and manifestation?
Have you not heard the teaching of right contemplation? Vimalakirti said: 'I observe the Tathagata as without beginning and without end, the six entrances have already passed, the three realms have already been transcended, not within the square nor outside the square, neither conditioned dharma nor unconditioned dharma, cannot be known by consciousness, cannot be understood by wisdom, without words, without speech, the place where the mind's activity ceases. Observing in this way is called right contemplation; observing in other ways is not seeing the Buddha.' The Fangguang Jing says: 'The Buddha is like empty space.'
無去無來應緣而現。無有方所 初句告問者。經說正觀。子獨未聞耶。維摩下亦約義引之。無始下三句顯超。生相已盡故云無始。滅相又亡故云無終。又三際已斷故。六入六根也。根境相入故名六入。已過者無漏凈色不入塵故。三界地獄系已亡故。不在下四句遮表同時。不可下四句顯體深玄。以此下結揀邪正。皆古譯之經與今經少殊。放光下即義。引彼經第三十卷法上菩薩答薩陀波侖所問之意。大疏云。若有方所此現彼無。無方所故感處即形。此前皆示自性涅槃。下示無住。亦應化涅槃也。
然則聖人之在天下也。寂寞虛無無執無競。導而弗先。感而後應 承前經意以辨。前云。佛如虛空隨緣而現。故云在天下。謂應無不周與體同遍。寂寞下顯非聲色。身非執受故。二執永無故竟諍也。無諍是涅槃故。導而下因感而導。疾前無藥故。
譬猶幽谷之響明鏡之像。對之弗知其所以來。隨之罔識其所以往。恍焉而有。惚焉而亡。動而逾寂。隱而彌彰。出幽入冥變化無常 顯無住也。初四句喻說。后六句法喻皆通。谷鏡皆喻無名之體。對鏡之質。呼谷之人皆喻能感之機。若響若像皆喻于應。于中像喻應身。響喻說法。感之而來謂之有餘。來實非來。雖對之而不知所從。不住有餘也。感謝而往謂之無餘。往實非往。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『無去無來應緣而現。無有方所』——第一句是告訴提問者，經書所說的正觀（Samyak-dṛṣṭi，正確的見解）。您難道沒有聽說過嗎？《維摩詰經》下面也根據這個意義引用了它。『無始』以下三句是顯示超脫。因為生相（birth aspect）已經窮盡，所以說是『無始』。滅相（cessation aspect）又已消亡，所以說是『無終』。又因為過去、現在、未來三際（three periods of time）已經斷絕。『六入』（ṣaḍāyatana，六種感官的入口）指的是六根（ṣaḍindriya，六種感官）。根（indriya，感官）與境（viṣaya，對像）相互作用，所以叫做六入。『已過者』指的是無漏（anāsrava，沒有煩惱）的清凈色（śuddha-varṇa，純凈的色法）不進入塵世。『三界』（trayo dhātu，欲界、色界、無色界）地獄的束縛已經消亡，所以不在其中。『不在』以下四句是遮止表象的同時存在。『不可』以下四句是顯示本體的深奧玄妙。『以此』以下是總結並辨別邪正。這些古老的譯經與現在的經書略有不同。『放光』以下是根據意義引用。引用的是《大般若經》第三十卷法上菩薩（Dharmoddgata Bodhisattva）回答薩陀波侖（Sadāprarudita）所問的內容。大疏中說：『如果有固定的處所，那麼這個地方顯現，那個地方就沒有。因為沒有固定的處所，所以感應之處立即顯現形體。』以上這些都是爲了顯示自性涅槃（svabhāva-nirvāṇa，自性清凈的涅槃）。下面是顯示無住（anirodha，不停止）。也應是應化涅槃（nirmāṇa-nirvāṇa，應化身的涅槃）。 『然則聖人之在天下也，寂寞虛無無執無競。導而弗先，感而後應』——承接前面的經文意思來辨析。前面說：佛（Buddha）就像虛空一樣，隨緣而顯現，所以說『在天下』。意思是說，應化周遍一切，與本體同樣普遍。『寂寞』以下是顯示並非聲色（śabda-varṇa，聲音和顏色）。身體不是執取的對象，所以兩種執著（二執，我執和法執）永遠消失，因此沒有競爭。沒有競爭就是涅槃（nirvāṇa）。『導而』以下是因為感應而引導，如果走在前面，就沒有藥可以醫治了。 『譬猶幽谷之響明鏡之像。對之弗知其所以來。隨之罔識其所以往。恍焉而有。惚焉而亡。動而逾寂。隱而彌彰。出幽入冥變化無常』——顯示無住。最初四句是比喻說明，後面六句法喻都適用。山谷和鏡子都比喻無名（anāma，沒有名稱）的本體。面對鏡子的物體，呼喊山谷的人，都比喻能感應的機緣。無論是迴響還是映象，都比喻應現。其中，映象比喻應身（nirmāṇakāya，應化身），迴響比喻說法（dharma-deśanā，宣講佛法）。因為感應而來，所以說是有餘（sāvadhi，有剩餘）。來實際上不是真的來。即使面對它，也不知道從哪裡來，這就是不住有餘。因為感應而離去，所以說是無餘（niravadhi，沒有剩餘）。離去實際上不是真的離去。
【English Translation】 English version 『Without going, without coming, appearing in response to conditions. Without a fixed location』 – The first sentence tells the questioner that the sutra speaks of right view (Samyak-dṛṣṭi). Have you not heard it yourself? The Vimalakīrti Sutra below also quotes it according to this meaning. The three sentences from 『Without beginning』 onwards reveal transcendence. Because the aspect of birth (birth aspect) has been exhausted, it is said to be 『without beginning.』 The aspect of cessation (cessation aspect) has also vanished, so it is said to be 『without end.』 Moreover, because the three periods of time (three periods of time) – past, present, and future – have been cut off. 『Six entrances』 (ṣaḍāyatana, six sense entrances) refers to the six roots (ṣaḍindriya, six sense organs). The root (indriya, sense organ) interacts with the object (viṣaya, object), so it is called six entrances. 『Those that have passed』 refers to the undefiled (anāsrava, without defilements) pure form (śuddha-varṇa, pure form) not entering the dust. The bonds of the lower realms of the 『Three Realms』 (trayo dhātu, Desire Realm, Form Realm, Formless Realm) have vanished, so it is not within them. The four sentences from 『Not in』 onwards negate the simultaneous existence of appearances. The four sentences from 『Cannot』 onwards reveal the profound and mysterious nature of the essence. 『With this』 onwards concludes and distinguishes between the heretical and the correct. These ancient translations of the sutras differ slightly from the current sutras. 『Emitting light』 onwards quotes according to the meaning. It quotes the content of the thirtieth volume of the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra, where Dharmoddgata Bodhisattva answers the questions of Sadāprarudita. The Great Commentary says: 『If there is a fixed location, then this place appears, and that place does not. Because there is no fixed location, the place of response immediately manifests form.』 All of the above is to reveal the self-nature nirvana (svabhāva-nirvāṇa, self-nature pure nirvana). Below shows non-abiding (anirodha, non-stopping). It should also be the manifested nirvana (nirmāṇa-nirvāṇa, manifested body nirvana). 『Therefore, when a sage is in the world, he is solitary, empty, without attachment, and without contention. He guides but does not lead, he responds only after being sensed』 – Continuing the meaning of the previous sutra to analyze. The previous sutra said: The Buddha (Buddha) is like empty space, appearing in response to conditions, so it says 『in the world.』 It means that the manifested body pervades everything and is as universal as the essence. 『Solitary』 onwards reveals that it is not sound and form (śabda-varṇa, sound and color). The body is not an object of attachment, so the two attachments (two attachments, attachment to self and attachment to dharma) disappear forever, therefore there is no contention. No contention is nirvana (nirvāṇa). 『Guides』 onwards is because of sensing and then guiding; if you go ahead, there is no medicine to cure it. 『It is like an echo in a secluded valley, or an image in a bright mirror. Facing it, one does not know where it comes from. Following it, one does not know where it goes. It seems to exist, yet it vanishes in an instant. Moving, it becomes even more silent; hidden, it becomes even more manifest. Emerging from darkness, entering into darkness, changing without constancy』 – Reveals non-abiding. The first four sentences are metaphorical explanations, and the last six sentences apply to both the Dharma and the metaphor. The valley and the mirror both symbolize the nameless (anāma, without name) essence. The object facing the mirror, the person calling into the valley, both symbolize the opportunity to sense. Whether it is an echo or an image, it symbolizes the response. Among them, the image symbolizes the manifested body (nirmāṇakāya, manifested body), and the echo symbolizes the Dharma teaching (dharma-deśanā, teaching the Dharma). Because it comes in response to sensing, it is said to be with remainder (sāvadhi, with remainder). Coming is not really coming. Even facing it, one does not know where it comes from, this is non-abiding with remainder. Because it departs in response to sensing, it is said to be without remainder (niravadhi, without remainder). Departing is not really departing.
欲隨之而不知所向。不住無餘也。喻意可知。動即有也。隱即無也。機見去來聖無所住。故云動而等。出幽下釋成出無入有棄有入無。變化權宜理非常準。無名之道。譬月印空虧盈不遷出入常湛。
其為稱也(二名)因應而作。顯跡為生。息跡為滅。生名有餘。滅名無餘 生滅因乎顯息。有無復由生滅。隨跡而起。非假名何。
然則有無之稱本乎無名。無名之道於何不名 有無跡也。末也無名。實也。本也跡從。實現末自本名。
是以至人居方而方。止圓而圓。在天而天。處人而人 承前於何不名。以示用也。逐器應形無不能也。方圓喻殊機。應天為天。應人名人。同類攝生無擇鹿馬居士宰官等。如本經廣示。
原(窮)夫能天能人者。豈天人之所能哉。果以非天非人故。能天能人耳 是天是人之定報。豈能應天應人而現形。正由非天非人。所以能應天人。有體方用。
其為治(化)也。應而不為因而不施。因而不施故。施莫之廣。應而不為故。為莫之大 現身名應。感而後應。聖不為也。現通說法名施。因機而作。聖不施也。施作也。平聲。起信論示用大云。第一義諦無有世諦。離於施作。但隨眾生見聞得益等。莫之者。含具二意。一最大最廣故。如眾生界一時皆感。亦一時普應。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：想要追隨它卻不知該往哪個方向。不停留于任何事物，也不滯留于空無。其中的含義可以理解。動就是『有』（bhava），隱就是『無』（abhava）。聖人洞察事物變化的來龍去脈，卻不執著于任何地方，所以說『動而等』。『出幽』是解釋從無到有，『棄有入無』是變化權宜之計，並非一成不變的準則，是無名之道。好比月亮映在空中，月亮的盈虧變化並不影響天空的澄澈，出入變化而天空常湛。 所謂的『稱』（nāma，名稱），是因應事物而產生的。顯現軌跡就稱為『生』（jāti），止息軌跡就稱為『滅』（nirodha）。生名為『有餘』（saśeṣa），滅名為『無餘』（niravaśeṣa）。生滅是由於顯現和止息，有無又是由生滅而來。這些都是隨著事物軌跡而起的假名而已。 那麼，有無的稱謂，本源於無名。無名之道，在什麼方面不能稱說呢？有無是事物的表象，是末端；無名是事物的本質，是根本。表象跟隨本質而顯現，末端自然源於根本，所以才有名。 因此，至人處在方形中就呈現方形，處在圓形中就呈現圓形，在天界就呈現天人的形象，在人間就呈現人類的形象。這是承接前面所說的『在什麼方面不能稱說』，是爲了顯示作用。隨著器物的形狀而變化，沒有什麼不能做到的。方形和圓形比喻不同的機緣。應天而為天，應人而為人，與同類眾生相攝，沒有選擇，無論是鹿、馬、居士、宰官等等，都一樣。如同本經廣泛所示。 探究那能夠呈現天人形象的人，難道是天人所能做到的嗎？正是因為他既非天人，也非人類，所以才能呈現天人和人類的形象。是天是人，是固定的業報，怎麼能應天應人而現形呢？正是因為他既非天也非人，所以才能應天應人。有了本體才能發揮作用。 他的治理（教化），是應機而不妄為，順應事物而不強加干涉。因為順應事物而不強加干涉，所以他的施為才最為廣博；因為應機而不妄為，所以他的作為才最為偉大。現身說法稱為『應』，因感應而應現，聖人不會主動去做。現神通說法稱為『施』，因應眾生的根機而施為，聖人不會主動施捨。『施』是施作的意思。如《起信論》所示，第一義諦沒有世俗諦，遠離施作，只是隨著眾生的見聞而讓他們得到利益等等。『莫之』包含兩種意思，一是最大，二是最廣，所以說，如同眾生界一時都產生感應，也一時普遍應現。
【English Translation】 English version: Wanting to follow it but not knowing which direction to go. Not dwelling on anything, nor lingering in emptiness. The meaning is understandable. 'Moving' (calana) is 'being' (bhava), 'hidden' (gupta) is 'non-being' (abhava). The sage discerns the coming and going of things, yet is not attached to any place, hence it is said 'moving and equal'. 'Emerging from the hidden' explains going from non-being to being, 'abandoning being and entering non-being' is a change of expediency, not a fixed principle, it is the nameless path. It is like the moon reflected in the sky, the waxing and waning of the moon does not affect the clarity of the sky, changing in and out while the sky is always clear. What is called 'name' (nāma), arises in response to things. Manifesting traces is called 'birth' (jāti), ceasing traces is called 'cessation' (nirodha). Birth is called 'with remainder' (saśeṣa), cessation is called 'without remainder' (niravaśeṣa). Birth and cessation are due to manifestation and cessation, being and non-being arise from birth and cessation. These are merely provisional names that arise following the traces of things. Then, the terms being and non-being originate from the nameless. In what aspect can the nameless path not be named? Being and non-being are the appearances of things, the ends; the nameless is the essence of things, the root. Appearances follow the essence to manifest, the ends naturally originate from the root, hence there are names. Therefore, the perfect person is square in a square, round in a round, appears as a deva in the heavens, and appears as a human among humans. This continues from what was said earlier, 'in what aspect can it not be named', it is to show the function. Changing with the shape of the vessel, there is nothing that cannot be done. Square and round are metaphors for different opportunities. Responding to the heavens as a deva, responding to humans as a human, embracing sentient beings of the same kind, without selection, whether deer, horses, laymen, or officials, all are the same. As widely shown in this sutra. Investigating the one who can appear as a deva and a human, is it what a deva or a human can do? It is precisely because they are neither deva nor human that they can appear as devas and humans. Being a deva or a human is a fixed karmic result, how can they respond to devas and humans and manifest forms? It is precisely because they are neither deva nor human that they can respond to devas and humans. Having the essence allows for function. Their governance (teaching) is responding to the occasion without acting arbitrarily, conforming to things without imposing interference. Because of conforming to things without imposing interference, their actions are the most extensive; because of responding to the occasion without acting arbitrarily, their actions are the greatest. Manifesting a body and speaking the Dharma is called 'responding', responding because of being sensed, the sage does not initiate it. Manifesting supernatural powers and speaking the Dharma is called 'giving', acting in response to the faculties of sentient beings, the sage does not actively give. 'Giving' means acting. As shown in the Awakening of Faith, the first principle has no worldly truth, it is apart from acting, it simply allows sentient beings to gain benefit from what they see and hear. 'Mo zhi' contains two meanings, one is the greatest, and the other is the most extensive, so it is said that just as the realm of sentient beings all sense at once, they also universally respond at once.
此應之大更無大於此者。施例之。二忘廣大之相。亦云莫之。如下云。
為莫之大。故乃返于小成。施莫之廣。故乃歸乎無名 莫之者。亦忘乎至大至廣之相也。由忘乎大。故曰小成。但寄小以遣大。豈住小成。由忘乎廣故歸無名。總前意云。謂依體起用即用恒體。非體時不用用時不體。體用無住無不住也。
經曰。菩提之道不可圖度。高而無上廣不可極。淵而無下深不可測。大包天地細入無間。故謂之道 經即太子本起瑞應經也。菩提秘藏中般若故。圖度思慮也。何故不可耶。以高而無上等。謂高深有際可思。上下無窮故不可也。天地至大智又包含。無間至小智復入中無間。如子微極細無中間也。以證涅槃體大用廣。
然則涅槃之道。不可以有無得之明矣。
而惑者睹神變因謂之有。見滅度便謂之無。有無之境妄想之域。豈足以標榜玄道。而語聖心者乎 執跡迷本。亦猶逐派而亡源。且略標涅槃。令其知有。而於正位猶為剩名。計跡為實空花結果。
意謂至人寂怕無兆隱顯同源。存不為有亡不為無 至人法身德也。正位之中有無幾微。亦不形兆。故云寂怕。余可了。
何則佛言。吾無生不生。雖生不生無形不形。雖形不形以知存不為有 初句放光。即彼二十六中文。無形下亦
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 沒有什麼比這更大的了。舉個例子，就是忘卻廣大之相，也可以說是『莫之』。如下文所說： 『因為沒有比它更大的，所以迴歸于小的成就；因為沒有比它更廣的，所以歸於無名。』 『莫之』，也就是忘卻至大至廣之相。因為忘卻了『大』，所以說是『小成』，但只是借用『小』來遣除『大』，難道會停留在『小成』嗎？因為忘卻了『廣』，所以歸於無名。總括前面的意思說，就是依體起用，即用恒常的體性，不是體性的時候不用，用的時候沒有體性，體用無住，無所不住。 經書上說：『菩提之道不可圖度，高而無上，廣不可極，淵而無下，深不可測，大包天地，細入無間，所以稱之為道。』 這裡說的經書就是《太子本起瑞應經》。菩提的秘密蘊藏在般若智慧中，所以不可圖度，不可思慮。為什麼不可以呢？因為『高而無上』等等，說的是高深有邊際可以思考，上下無窮所以不可以。天地至大，智慧又能包含；無間至小，智慧又能進入其中，就像子微極細，沒有中間一樣。這是用以證明涅槃的體性廣大，作用廣泛。 既然如此，那麼涅槃之道，不可以有無來獲得，就很明顯了。 而迷惑的人看到神變，就認為是『有』；見到滅度，就認為是『無』。『有』和『無』的境界，都是妄想的領域，怎麼能夠用來標榜玄妙的道，而談論聖人的心境呢？執著于表象而迷惑了根本，就像追逐支流而失去了源頭。姑且簡略地標示涅槃，讓他們知道有這麼回事，但在正位中仍然是多餘的名相。如果把表象當成真實，就像是虛空的花朵結出了果實。 意思是說，至人寂靜無聲，沒有預兆，隱沒和顯現同出一源。存在不認為是『有』，消失不認為是『無』。至人是法身之德。在正位之中，『有』和『無』的細微差別，也不顯現出任何跡象，所以說是寂靜無聲。其餘的可以理解。 為什麼這麼說呢？佛說：『我無生不生，雖然生而不生；無形不形，雖然形而不形。』以此可知存在不認為是『有』。第一句是放光，就是那二十六文中的內容。『無形』下面也是。
【English Translation】 English version: There is nothing greater than this. To give an example, it is forgetting the aspect of vastness, which can also be called 'Mo Zhi' (莫之, 'nothing beyond'). As it says below: 'Because there is nothing greater than it, it returns to small accomplishment; because there is nothing broader than it, it returns to no-name.' 'Mo Zhi' means forgetting the aspects of utmost greatness and vastness. Because of forgetting 'greatness,' it is called 'small accomplishment,' but it is only borrowing 'smallness' to dispel 'greatness.' How could one dwell in 'small accomplishment'? Because of forgetting 'broadness,' it returns to no-name. Summarizing the previous meaning, it means that arising from the essence is using the constant essence. It is not that the essence is not used when it is the time of essence, or that there is no essence when it is the time of use. Essence and use are without dwelling, and there is nowhere they do not dwell. The scripture says: 'The path of Bodhi cannot be measured, high without superior, broad without limit, deep without bottom, profound without measure, encompassing heaven and earth, entering the space between.' Therefore, it is called the Dao (道, the Way). The scripture mentioned here is the 'Benqi Ruiying Jing' (太子本起瑞應經, Sutra of the Auspicious Responses of the Prince's Initial Arising). The secret treasure of Bodhi is hidden in Prajna (般若, wisdom), so it cannot be measured or contemplated. Why not? Because 'high without superior,' etc., refers to height and depth having boundaries that can be thought about, but up and down are infinite, so it cannot be. Heaven and earth are extremely large, but wisdom can encompass them. The space between is extremely small, but wisdom can enter it, just like the extremely fine particles of a child, with no middle ground. This is to prove that the nature of Nirvana (涅槃, liberation) is vast and its function is broad. Since this is the case, then it is clear that the path of Nirvana cannot be attained through 'existence' or 'non-existence'. Those who are deluded, upon seeing divine transformations, consider it 'existence'; upon seeing extinction, they consider it 'non-existence.' The realms of 'existence' and 'non-existence' are domains of delusion. How can they be used to proclaim the profound Dao and discuss the mind of the sage? Clinging to appearances and being deluded about the fundamental is like chasing after branches and losing the source. Let us briefly indicate Nirvana so that they know there is such a thing, but in the correct position, it is still a superfluous name. Considering appearances as reality is like empty flowers bearing fruit. The meaning is that the perfect person is silent and still, without omens, and concealment and manifestation come from the same source. Existence is not considered 'existence,' and disappearance is not considered 'non-existence.' The perfect person is the virtue of the Dharmakaya (法身, Dharma Body). In the correct position, the subtle differences between 'existence' and 'non-existence' do not manifest any signs, so it is said to be silent and still. The rest can be understood. Why is this so? The Buddha said: 'I am unborn, not born; though born, not born; formless, not formed; though formed, not formed.' From this, it can be known that existence is not considered 'existence.' The first sentence is the emission of light, which is the content of those twenty-six texts. The same applies below 'formless'.
義。引放光涅槃等經。以知下論斷。生謂四生。無生不生者。猶云無一生而不生。形謂六道萬類之形。猶云無一形而不形。何者。如忍辱太子等胎生也。雁王鸚鵡卵生也。頂生手生濕生也。為天為鬼化生也。四生攝於萬類。如涅槃三十二云。菩薩摩訶薩受羆身乃至鹿兔龍蛇等身。然但由感起即應而真故。復云不生不形。即不為有也。
經云。菩薩入無盡三昧。盡見過去滅度諸佛。又云。入于涅槃而不般涅槃。以知亡不為無 初引晉華嚴。即安住長者。成就法門名不滅度。所得三昧名無盡佛性。唐譯名佛種無盡。梵云三昧。此云正思亦云正受。無盡者。以佛性無盡。故入此三昧見三世佛亦無盡。又此宗中三世互現故。現在中見過未佛也。廣示如經。后引義同。即本經二十一中之義。是知栴檀塔下勝觀元存。靈鷲山中釋迦常在。莫隨妄想見有去來。
亡不為無。故雖無而有。存不為有故。雖有而無。雖有而無。所謂非有。雖無而有。所謂非無 躡前以顯二非之中。無住涅槃。跡不可執。
然則涅槃之道果出有無之域。絕言象之逕斷矣 四法皆非。真應莫羈。有無不住言象何及。教明如鏡理直似弦。喻合符契義皎白晝斷然超絕。無襲前惑。
子乃云。聖人患于有身。故滅身以歸無。勞勤莫先於有智
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 義：引用《放光般若經》、《涅槃經》等經典，以下面的文字進行論斷。「生」指的是四生（胎生、卵生、濕生、化生）。「無生不生」的意思是，沒有哪一種生命不是由四生而來。「形」指的是六道（天道、人道、阿修羅道、畜生道、餓鬼道、地獄道）中萬物的形態，意思是，沒有哪一種形態不是六道輪迴中的形態。為什麼這麼說呢？比如忍辱太子等是胎生，雁王、鸚鵡是卵生，頂生、手生是濕生，為天人為鬼是化生。四生涵蓋了萬物。如《涅槃經》三十二中說，菩薩摩訶薩可以示現為熊的身軀，乃至鹿、兔、龍、蛇等身軀。然而，這只是由於感應而示現的，並非真實的，所以又說「不生不形」，即不是真實存在的。
經文說：菩薩進入無盡三昧（一種禪定狀態），能夠完全見到過去已經滅度的諸佛。又說：進入涅槃（寂滅）而不般涅槃（完全寂滅）。這是因為知道「亡」不是「無」。最初引用晉譯《華嚴經》，即安住長者成就的法門名為「不滅度」，所得的三昧名為「無盡佛性」。唐譯本名為「佛種無盡」。梵語「三昧」，這裡翻譯為「正思」，也翻譯為「正受」。「無盡」的意思是，因為佛性是無盡的，所以進入這種三昧能夠見到三世（過去、現在、未來）諸佛也是無盡的。而且在這個宗派中，三世是互相顯現的，所以在現在中能夠見到過去和未來的佛。詳細的闡述如經文所說。後面引用的意思相同，即本經第二十一品中的含義。由此可知，栴檀塔下殊勝的觀行原本就存在，靈鷲山中釋迦牟尼佛也常在。不要隨著虛妄的念頭，認為有來有去。
「亡不為無」，所以雖然看似沒有，但實際上是有的。「存不為有」，所以雖然看似有，但實際上是沒有的。雖然有而無，這叫做「非有」。雖然無而有，這叫做「非無」。承接前面的話，是爲了彰顯二非（非有非無）之中，無住涅槃的境界，其軌跡是無法執著的。
如此說來，涅槃的道路果真超出了有和無的範疇，斷絕了言語和形象的途徑。四法（有、無、亦有亦無、非有非無）皆非，真身和應身都不受束縛。有和無都不能停留，言語和形象又怎麼能夠觸及呢？教義的闡明如同鏡子一般清晰，道理如同筆直的琴絃一般順暢。比喻和實際情況完全符合，意義如同白晝一般明亮，斷然是超絕的，不會重複之前的迷惑。
您卻說：聖人擔憂有身體，所以滅掉身體以歸於無。勞苦勤奮沒有比擁有智慧更甚的了。
【English Translation】 English version: Meaning: Quoting the Fangguang Borejing (放光般若經, Sutra of the Release of Light) and the Nirvana Sutra (涅槃經), etc., to make a judgment with the following words. 'Birth' refers to the four kinds of birth (womb-born, egg-born, moisture-born, and transformation-born). 'No birth is not born' means that there is no life that does not come from the four kinds of birth. 'Form' refers to the forms of all things in the six realms (heaven, human, asura, animal, hungry ghost, and hell), meaning that there is no form that is not in the cycle of the six realms. Why is this said? For example, Prince Kshanti (忍辱太子) and others are womb-born, the Goose King (雁王) and parrots (鸚鵡) are egg-born, Top-born (頂生) and Hand-born (手生) are moisture-born, and being a deva (天) or a ghost (鬼) is transformation-born. The four kinds of birth encompass all things.
As the thirty-second chapter of the Nirvana Sutra says, a Bodhisattva Mahasattva can manifest as the body of a bear, or even the bodies of deer, rabbits, dragons, snakes, etc. However, this is only a manifestation due to karmic response and is not real, so it is also said 'not born, not formed,' which means it is not truly existent.
The sutra says: 'Bodhisattvas enter the Samadhi of Infinity (無盡三昧, a state of meditation) and can completely see all the Buddhas of the past who have passed away.' It also says: 'Enter Nirvana (涅槃, extinction) without Parinirvana (般涅槃, complete extinction).' This is because they know that 'cessation' is not 'non-existence.' Initially, the Jin translation of the Avatamsaka Sutra (華嚴經) is cited, namely the Dharma gate achieved by Elder Anzhuzhang (安住長者) is called 'Non-Extinction,' and the Samadhi obtained is called 'Infinite Buddha-nature' (無盡佛性). The Tang translation is called 'Endless Buddha-seed' (佛種無盡). The Sanskrit word 'Samadhi' (三昧) is translated here as 'Right Thought' or 'Right Reception.' 'Infinite' means that because Buddha-nature is infinite, entering this Samadhi can see the Buddhas of the three times (past, present, and future) as also infinite. Moreover, in this school, the three times manifest mutually, so one can see the Buddhas of the past and future in the present. Detailed explanations are as the sutra says. The meaning of the later citation is the same, namely the meaning in the twenty-first chapter of this sutra. From this, it can be known that the excellent contemplation under the Sandalwood Pagoda (栴檀塔) originally existed, and Shakyamuni Buddha (釋迦牟尼佛) is always present in Vulture Peak (靈鷲山). Do not follow deluded thoughts and think there is coming and going.
'Cessation is not non-existence,' so although it seems non-existent, it is actually existent. 'Existence is not existence,' so although it seems existent, it is actually non-existent. Although existent and non-existent, this is called 'neither existent.' Although non-existent and existent, this is called 'neither non-existent.' Continuing from the previous words, it is to highlight that within the two negations (neither existent nor non-existent), the state of Non-abiding Nirvana (無住涅槃) is such that its traces cannot be grasped.
Thus, the path of Nirvana truly transcends the realm of existence and non-existence, and cuts off the path of words and images. All four dharmas (existence, non-existence, both existence and non-existence, neither existence nor non-existence) are negated, and the true body and manifested body are not bound. Existence and non-existence cannot be dwelled upon, so how can words and images reach it? The explanation of the teachings is as clear as a mirror, and the principle is as smooth as a straight zither string. The metaphor and the reality completely match, and the meaning is as bright as daylight, resolutely transcending and not repeating previous delusions.
You say: 'Sages worry about having a body, so they extinguish the body to return to non-existence. No labor is greater than having wisdom.'
。故絕智以淪虛。無乃乖乎神極。傷于玄旨者也 此非答前正問。以前名家敘入無餘。所以云。身為大患。智為雜毒。此見淺近過患良深。故答問已。兼破此(計初敘計)無乃下責非。神極者。神妙至理。玄旨者。幽玄經旨。
經曰。法身無相應物以形。般若無知對緣而照 晉經三十二略云。清凈法身非有非無。隨眾生所應。悉能示現。下對即諸部般若之意。無身而形。非心而照。引此意明。身心尚無勞患何起。
萬機頓赴而不撓其神。千難殊對而不幹其慮。動若行雲止猶穀神。豈有心於彼此。情繫于動靜者乎 般若無知也。初四句法說萬機大數也。不撓有二。一由機感故。如水澄月現。二由無思故如摩尼出生。千難例同。次二句喻明有餘名動。如行雲無餘名靜。猶穀神也。穀神出道經。彼云。穀神不死。后二句正明無心。
既無心於動靜。亦無相於去來 法身無相也。初句躡前。后句例身。以釋前文法身無相。去為無餘。來為有餘。
去來不以相故。無器而不形。動靜不以心故。無感而不應 躡前雙明身心。以成前文。應物而形對緣而照。
然則心生於有心。相出於有相 機有身心之感而聖。有身心之應。
像非我出故。金石流而不焦。心非我生故日用而不動。紜紜(多)自
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：因此，如果斷絕智慧而歸於空無，恐怕就違背了神妙至極的道理，傷害了幽玄的經文主旨。這並非直接回答前面的提問，而是因為之前名家敘述進入涅槃的境界，所以說，以身為大患，以智為雜毒。這種見解淺薄，過失很深。因此，在回答提問之後，順便破斥這種觀點（最初敘述這種觀點）。『無乃下』是責備之詞。『神極』指的是神妙至極的道理，『玄旨』指的是幽玄的經文主旨。 經文說：『法身（Dharmakaya）沒有可以用形象來比擬的事物，般若（Prajna）沒有知覺，只是面對因緣而照見。』晉譯的經文三十二略本說：『清凈的法身（Dharmakaya）非有非無，隨著眾生所應，都能示現。』下面所說的『對』，就是指各部的般若（Prajna）的含義。沒有身形卻能顯現形象，沒有心識卻能照見。引用這個意思來說明，身和心尚且不存在，憂慮從何而起？ 萬種機緣同時到來，也不會擾亂他的精神；千種難題同時應對，也不會干擾他的思慮。他的行動就像流動的雲彩，他的靜止就像空曠的山谷。哪裡會有對彼此的分別心，哪裡會有對動靜的執著呢？般若（Prajna）是沒有知覺的。最初四句是就法理而言，說明萬種機緣的大數。『不撓』有兩種含義：一是由於機緣的感應，就像水清澈時月亮自然顯現；二是由於沒有思慮，就像如意寶珠自然出生。千種難題也是同樣的道理。接下來的兩句用比喻來說明，有餘的境界名為動，就像流動的雲彩；無餘的境界名為靜，就像空曠的山谷。『穀神』出自《道德經》，其中說：『穀神不死。』最後兩句正是說明沒有分別心。 既然沒有對動靜的執著，也就沒有對去來的執相。法身（Dharmakaya）是沒有形相的。前一句承接上文，后一句類比法身（Dharmakaya），用以解釋前文所說的法身（Dharmakaya）沒有形相。去，指的是無餘；來，指的是有餘。 不去不來，不是因為有形相的緣故，所以沒有器物不能顯現形體；不靜不動，不是因為有心識的緣故，所以沒有感應不能迴應。承接上文，同時說明身和心，以成就前文所說的應物而顯現形體，對緣而照見。 如此說來，心產生於有心，相產生於有相。機緣有身心的感應，聖人有身心的迴應。 現象不是我所創造的，所以金屬和石頭在流動中也不會焦爛；心不是我所產生的，所以每天都在運用卻不會動搖。紛紛擾擾，都是...
【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, if one cuts off wisdom and returns to emptiness, I fear that it would violate the ultimate principle of the divine and harm the profound meaning of the scriptures. This is not a direct answer to the previous question, but because the previous masters described entering Nirvana, they said that the body is a great affliction and wisdom is a mixed poison. This view is shallow and the fault is very deep. Therefore, after answering the question, I also refute this view (initially describing this view). 'Wu Nai Xia' is a word of blame. 'Shen Ji' refers to the ultimate principle of the divine, and 'Xuan Zhi' refers to the profound meaning of the scriptures. The sutra says: 'The Dharmakaya (法身) has no corresponding object to take form, and Prajna (般若) has no knowledge, but illuminates according to conditions.' The Jin translation of the thirty-two abbreviated version of the sutra says: 'The pure Dharmakaya (法身) is neither existent nor non-existent, and can manifest according to the needs of all beings.' The 'dui' mentioned below refers to the meaning of Prajna (般若) in various sections. There is no body but it can manifest form, and there is no mind but it can illuminate. Quoting this meaning to illustrate, if the body and mind do not even exist, where do worries arise from? Ten thousand opportunities come at once without disturbing his spirit; a thousand difficulties are dealt with at once without interfering with his thoughts. His movement is like flowing clouds, and his stillness is like an empty valley. Where would there be a discriminating mind towards each other, and where would there be an attachment to movement and stillness? Prajna (般若) is without knowledge. The first four sentences are about the Dharma, explaining the great number of ten thousand opportunities. 'Bu Nao' has two meanings: one is due to the response of opportunities, just as the moon naturally appears when the water is clear; the other is due to the absence of thought, just as the Mani jewel is naturally born. The same applies to a thousand difficulties. The next two sentences use metaphors to illustrate that the realm of remainder is called movement, like flowing clouds; the realm of no remainder is called stillness, like an empty valley. 'Gu Shen' comes from the Tao Te Ching, which says: 'The valley spirit never dies.' The last two sentences precisely explain the absence of a discriminating mind. Since there is no attachment to movement and stillness, there is also no attachment to coming and going. The Dharmakaya (法身) has no form. The previous sentence follows the previous text, and the latter sentence is analogous to the Dharmakaya (法身), used to explain the previous text that the Dharmakaya (法身) has no form. Going refers to no remainder; coming refers to remainder. Going and coming are not because of form, so there is no object that cannot manifest form; not still and not moving are not because of mind, so there is no feeling that cannot respond. Following the previous text, it simultaneously explains the body and mind, in order to achieve the previous text that responds to objects and manifests form, and illuminates according to conditions. Thus, the mind arises from having a mind, and the form arises from having a form. Opportunities have the response of body and mind, and the sage has the response of body and mind. Phenomena are not created by me, so metal and stone will not be charred in the flow; the mind is not produced by me, so it is used every day without shaking. The hustle and bustle, all are...
彼。於我何為 像非聖出。心非聖生。既由機感而現。此身此心何患何勞。故出現疏云。像非我有。自彼器之虧盈。心非我生。豈普現之前後。金石下即莊子逍遙篇云。大旱金石流。土山焦而不熱等。
所以智周萬物而不勞。形充八極而無患。益不可盈。損不可虧 八極八方之極際也。無心之心遍知一切而何勞。非身之身份應八方而弗患。至於遣侍問候。只敘禮儀。答以輕安俯隨世范。豈曰小疾須乳為雷居士呵哉。后二句以身心無為。故非所損益。初句擬繫辭。
寧復痾癘中逵。壽極雙樹。靈竭天棺。體盡焚燎者哉 長阿含等說。如來向拘尸羅城中路背痛。令弟子四疊僧伽黎樹下休息等。天棺即金棺也。依古聖輪王葬儀而作。故言天棺。意云。身心非有自感而興。非益能盈非損可虧。豈同小乘之見半路背痛雙林壽終。靈智滅于天棺。聖體灰于焚燎也。
而惑者居見聞之境。尋殊應之跡。秉執規矩以擬大方。欲以智勞至人形患大聖。謂舍有入無。因以名之。豈可謂采微言于聽表。拔玄根于虛壤者哉 初二句法說。次二句喻明。方曰規。圓曰矩。今之梓匠所用斗尺也。意云。任見聞之情執殊應之跡。欲求無名之妙。如人手執斗尺擬量大方。不知其可也。故本經名為二乘曲見。欲以下正明謬執。豈可下責
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『彼。於我何為』（那又與我何干呢）？『象非聖出』（現象並非聖人創造），『心非聖生』（心識並非聖人所生）。既然是由機緣感應而顯現，那麼這個身體和心識又有什麼可憂慮和操勞的呢？所以《出現疏》說：『象非我有』（現象並非我所擁有），而是取決於外界事物的盈虧；『心非我生』（心識並非我所生），難道在普遍顯現之前或之後才存在嗎？就像《莊子·逍遙遊》篇所說：『大旱金石流，土山焦而不熱』等等。 所以智慧周遍萬物卻不感到勞累，形體充滿八方卻沒有任何憂患。增加不了什麼，減少不了什麼。『八極』指八個方向的極遠之處。無心之心遍知一切，又有什麼勞累呢？非身之身份身應化於八方而沒有憂患。至於派遣侍者問候，只是敘述禮儀，回答以身體輕安，俯順世俗規範。難道說小小的疾病就需要像雷居士那樣大驚小怪嗎？后兩句說明身心本無為，所以不是損益的對象。第一句模仿《繫辭》的說法。 難道會像那些在痾癘中死去，在雙樹下壽終正寢，靈智在天棺中耗盡，身體在焚燒中化為灰燼的人一樣嗎？』《長阿含經》等記載，如來在前往拘尸那迦城的路上背痛，讓弟子在四疊僧伽梨樹下休息等等。『天棺』就是金棺，按照古代聖王（轉輪王）的葬禮儀式製作，所以說是『天棺』。意思是說，身心並非實有，而是由感應而生，既不能增加也不能減少，怎麼能像小乘那樣，認為佛陀也會半路背痛，在雙林樹下壽終，靈智在天棺中消滅，聖體在焚燒中化為灰燼呢？ 而那些迷惑的人，侷限於見聞的境界，追尋特殊的感應跡象，秉持固定的規矩來衡量廣大的道，想要用智力來勞累人形，用憂患來困擾大聖，認為這是捨棄有而進入無，因此給它命名。這難道可以稱得上是從言語之外採擷精微的道理，從虛無的土壤中拔出玄妙的根基嗎？』前兩句是法理上的說明，后兩句是比喻說明。方為規，圓為矩，是現在木匠所使用的工具。意思是說，沉溺於見聞之情，執著于特殊的感應跡象，想要尋求無名之妙，就像人用斗尺來衡量廣大的空間，不知道這是不可能的。所以本經將這種觀點稱為二乘的片面之見，想要用正理來破除謬誤執著。怎麼能用責備的口吻呢？
【English Translation】 English version 『What is that to me?』 『Phenomena do not come from sages,』 『Consciousness is not born from sages.』 Since it arises from the interaction of conditions, what worry or labor is there for this body and mind? Therefore, the 『Appearance Commentary』 says: 『Phenomena are not mine,』 but depend on the waxing and waning of external things; 『Consciousness is not born from me,』 does it only exist before or after universal manifestation? It is like what is said in the 『Free and Easy Wandering』 chapter of Zhuangzi: 『In a great drought, metal and stone melt, and earthen mountains are scorched but not hot,』 and so on. Therefore, wisdom pervades all things without feeling weary, and the form fills the eight directions without any worry. It cannot be increased, and it cannot be decreased. 『Eight extremes』 refers to the farthest reaches of the eight directions. The mind of no-mind knows everything without any labor. The body of no-body manifests in eight directions without worry. As for sending attendants to inquire, it is only to narrate etiquette, answering with physical ease and following worldly norms. Could it be said that a minor illness requires the fuss of Layman Lei? The latter two sentences explain that the body and mind are non-active, so they are not subject to gain or loss. The first sentence imitates the saying in the 『Appended Remarks』 of the Book of Changes. 『Could it be like those who die in pestilence, reach the end of their lives under the twin Sala trees, exhaust their spiritual wisdom in the heavenly coffin, and have their bodies reduced to ashes in cremation?』 The 『Longer Agama Sutra』 and others record that the Tathagata had a backache on the way to Kushinagar, and asked his disciples to rest under the four-layered Sanghati tree, and so on. 『Heavenly coffin』 is the golden coffin, made according to the funeral rites of ancient sage kings (Chakravartin), so it is called 『heavenly coffin.』 The meaning is that the body and mind are not real, but arise from interaction, and cannot be increased or decreased. How can it be like the Hinayana, which believes that the Buddha also had a backache on the way, reached the end of his life under the twin Sala trees, had his spiritual wisdom extinguished in the heavenly coffin, and had his sacred body reduced to ashes in cremation? But those who are deluded are confined to the realm of seeing and hearing, seeking special signs of response, holding to fixed rules to measure the vast Tao, wanting to use intelligence to weary the human form, and use worries to trouble the great sage, thinking that this is abandoning existence and entering non-existence, and therefore naming it. Can this be called picking up subtle principles from beyond words, and pulling out mysterious roots from the empty soil?』 The first two sentences are explanations in terms of Dharma, and the latter two sentences are metaphorical explanations. A square is a compass, and a circle is a square, which are the tools used by carpenters today. The meaning is that indulging in the emotions of seeing and hearing, clinging to special signs of response, wanting to seek the mystery of no-name, is like using a compass to measure vast space, not knowing that this is impossible. Therefore, this sutra calls this view the one-sided view of the Two Vehicles, wanting to use correct reasoning to break through erroneous attachments. How can it be done with a tone of blame?
其淺近。言即名言。謂有無之名應權施設。無實體性。非名之名。故云微言。會意忘名。故云聽表。玄根喻涅槃。出生世出世善故。事相本空。故云虛壤。意謂。有無二種。名相兩虛。無相無名涅槃顯現。義說采拔。
徴出第四 九折之二也。徴責也。前章云。涅槃之道果出有無之境。徴意云。有無二法攝盡一切。如何有無之外別有涅槃之體。今詳徴辭。包舉儒老有無之說。復引小乘有無二為例以徴之。下超境中皆超此有無。
有名曰。夫混元剖判萬有參(雜)分。有既有矣。不得不無。無不自無必因於有。所以高下相傾有無相生。此乃自然之。數數極於是 混謂混沌。元謂根元。剖判分裂也。萬有即萬物。世典多說。元氣鴻蒙而為混沌。形如雞子。爾後清氣上升。穹窿為天。濁氣下沉磅礴為地。即混元剖判。亦一生二也。盤古生中萬八千歲(云云)是二生三。盤古死後形分物兆。萬物叢生。是三生萬物。今意混元已前屬無。一氣始萌即入有境。是無而生有也。次二對明有無相成。所以下引老氏以結。皆明相因而起。此乃下顯是定數。非由使令。故曰自然。
以此而觀化母所育(生)理無幽顯。恢恑憰怪無非有也。有化而無。無非無也。然則有無之境。理無不統 化母道也。亦氣也。理無下據理而
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：其含義深奧而簡明。』言』即是名言（指稱謂和表達概念的語言），意味著』有』和』無』的名稱是根據具體情況權宜設立的，並沒有實體性。這並非一般的名稱，所以說是』微言』（精微的語言）。領會其意而忘卻名稱，所以說是』聽表』（通過外在的表達領會內在的真意）。』玄根』比喻涅槃（佛教的最高境界，指解脫和寂滅），因為它能出生世間和出世間的善法。』虛壤』意味著事物的表象本質上是空性的。意思是說，』有』和』無』這兩種名相都是虛幻不實的，當超越了』有』和』無』，沒有了名相的束縛，涅槃的境界就會顯現。』義說采拔』意味著從各種不同的觀點中提取和選擇精華。
第四部分，提出質疑：這是九折中的第二折。』徴』是質疑的意思。前一章說，涅槃的道路最終會超越』有』和』無』的境界。質疑的意思是，』有』和』無』這兩種法已經涵蓋了一切，為什麼在』有』和』無』之外，還存在一個獨立的涅槃本體呢？現在詳細分析這些質疑的言辭，它包含了儒家和道家關於』有』和』無』的說法，並且引用了小乘佛教中關於』有』和』無』的例子來提出質疑。下面超越境界的內容，都是爲了超越這種』有』和』無』的對立。
有人說：』混沌之初，天地剖開，萬物由此產生。既然有了』有』，就不得不有』無』。』無』不是憑空產生的，必定是由於』有』。所以高和下相互傾斜，』有』和』無』相互產生。這就是自然規律，規律的極致就在於此。』 』混』指的是混沌，』元』指的是根源。』剖判』是分裂的意思。』萬有』就是萬物。世俗的典籍大多說，元氣鴻蒙的狀態就是混沌，形狀像雞蛋。然後清氣上升，形成天空；濁氣下沉，凝聚成大地。這就是』混元剖判』，也就是一生二。盤古生於其中，經歷了一萬八千年（等等），這就是二生三。盤古死後，身體分解，形成各種事物，萬物叢生，這就是三生萬物。現在的意思是，在混沌之前屬於』無』，當一氣開始萌動時，就進入了』有』的境界，這就是』無』而生』有』。接下來兩句說明』有』和』無』相互依存。所以下面引用老子的思想來總結，都是爲了說明事物是相互依存而產生的。這表明這是事物發展的必然規律，不是由人為的力量所造成的，所以說是』自然』。
從這個角度來看，化育萬物的道（也可以說是氣），其道理沒有隱蔽和顯現之分。各種奇異古怪的現象，沒有不是由』有』產生的。』有』變化為』無』，』無』沒有不是由』無』產生的。既然如此，』有』和』無』的境界，其道理沒有不能統攝的。』化母』指的是道，也可以說是氣。』理無』是根據道理而...
【English Translation】 English version: Its meaning is profound and concise. 'Speech' (言) refers to nominal speech (language used to denote and express concepts), meaning that the names of 'existence' (有) and 'non-existence' (無) are expediently established according to specific circumstances and do not possess substantiality. This is not ordinary naming, hence it is called 'subtle speech' (微言). Comprehending the meaning and forgetting the name is why it is called 'listening to the expression' (聽表) (understanding the inner meaning through the external expression). 'Mysterious root' (玄根) is a metaphor for Nirvana (涅槃) (the ultimate state in Buddhism, referring to liberation and extinction), because it gives rise to both worldly and other-worldly good dharmas. 'Empty soil' (虛壤) means that the appearance of things is essentially empty. The meaning is that the two nominal characteristics of 'existence' and 'non-existence' are both illusory and unreal. When one transcends 'existence' and 'non-existence' and is free from the bondage of names and forms, the state of Nirvana will manifest. 'Meaningful discourse, selecting and extracting' (義說采拔) means extracting and selecting the essence from various viewpoints.
Section Four, Raising Questions: This is the second of the nine refutations. '徴' (Zheng) means to question. The previous chapter stated that the path of Nirvana ultimately transcends the realm of 'existence' and 'non-existence'. The meaning of the question is, since the two dharmas of 'existence' and 'non-existence' encompass everything, why is there an independent Nirvana essence outside of 'existence' and 'non-existence'? Now, analyzing these questioning words in detail, it encompasses the Confucian and Taoist sayings about 'existence' and 'non-existence', and cites examples of 'existence' and 'non-existence' in Theravada Buddhism to raise questions. The content below about transcending realms is all in order to transcend this opposition of 'existence' and 'non-existence'.
Someone says: 'In the beginning of chaos, heaven and earth were split open, and all things were produced from this. Since there is 'existence', there must be 'non-existence'. 'Non-existence' is not produced out of thin air, it must be due to 'existence'. Therefore, high and low incline towards each other, and 'existence' and 'non-existence' generate each other. This is the law of nature, and the ultimate of the law lies in this.' 'Chaos' (混) refers to chaos, and 'origin' (元) refers to the root. 'Splitting' (剖判) means to split. 'All existence' (萬有) is all things. Secular books mostly say that the state of primordial energy is chaos, shaped like an egg. Then the clear air rises to form the sky; the turbid air sinks and condenses into the earth. This is 'splitting of chaos', which is one generating two. Pangu (盤古) was born in it and went through eighteen thousand years (etc.), which is two generating three. After Pangu died, his body decomposed and formed various things, and all things sprang up, which is three generating all things. The current meaning is that before chaos belongs to 'non-existence', and when one energy begins to sprout, it enters the realm of 'existence', which is 'non-existence' generating 'existence'. The next two sentences explain that 'existence' and 'non-existence' depend on each other. Therefore, the following quotes Lao Tzu's thought to summarize, all to illustrate that things are interdependent and produced. This shows that this is the inevitable law of the development of things, not caused by human power, so it is called 'natural'.
From this perspective, the Dao (道) (also can be said as Qi (氣)) that nurtures all things, its principles have no distinction between hidden and manifest. All kinds of strange and bizarre phenomena are not produced by 'existence'. 'Existence' transforms into 'non-existence', and 'non-existence' is not produced by 'non-existence'. Since this is the case, the realm of 'existence' and 'non-existence', its principles have nothing that cannot be encompassed. 'Mother of transformation' (化母) refers to the Dao, also can be said as Qi. 'Principle without' (理無) is based on the principle of...
推。不論幽顯兩途之中。物有恢而大者。恑而奇者。憰而詐者。怪而妖者。妍丑多端鉅細萬狀。無非是有。既因無而有。必自有而無。千狀萬態皆入無也。然則下正明遍統。恢恑一句用莊子文。已上儒老皆有此論。何晏王弼諸儒各有申說。謂之清談。事在通鑑諸書。故今論主假問而遣。
經云。有無二法攝一切法。又稱三無為者。虛空數緣盡非數緣盡 數名慧數。緣即是慧盡為滅諦。謂無漏慧斷諸煩惱。證滅諦理。唐譯名擇滅無為。非數緣盡者。即諸法緣離自滅。於此三中取第二為小乘涅槃。第三同前儒老。自有入無。以明有無攝世出世。以無餘即出世法故。
而論曰。有無之表別有妙道。妙于有無謂之涅槃。請核妙道之本(體)果若有也。雖妙非無。雖妙非無。即入有境果若無也。無即無差。無而無差即入無境。總而括(檢東)之即而究之。無有異有而非無。無有異無而非有者明矣 初四句引前違文。請核正難。下意云。妙道之體畢竟有之。體雖玄妙不可謂無。便入有境。下無例同總而下正顯所收。意謂妙本非有。非無者。非有即是無。非無即是有。未曾見一法異有之外而為非無者。下句例說。
而曰。有無之外別有妙道非有。非無謂之涅槃。吾聞其語矣。未即於心也 耳雖聞其說心未悟其理。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 推究起來，無論是幽冥還是顯明這兩個方面，事物有宏大和廣闊的，有怪異和奇異的，有狡猾和欺詐的，有古怪和妖邪的，美和丑形態各異，巨大和細小千差萬別，沒有哪一樣不是『有』。既然是因為『無』而產生『有』，那麼必然會從『有』走向『無』。千種形態萬般姿態最終都歸於『無』。既然如此，那麼下面就正確地闡明普遍的統攝。『恢恑』一句用了莊子的文章。以上儒家和道家都有這樣的論述。何晏、王弼等儒士各有闡述和說明，稱之為清談。這些事情記載在《通鑑》等書籍中。所以現在論主假設提問而加以排除。
經書中說：『有』和『無』這兩種法涵蓋了一切法。又稱三種『無為』，即虛空無為、數緣盡無為和非數緣盡無為。『數』指的是智慧，『緣』就是智慧的止息，也就是滅諦。指的是用無漏的智慧斷除各種煩惱，證得滅諦的道理。唐朝的譯本稱之為『擇滅無為』。『非數緣盡』指的是各種法因緣離散而自然消滅。在這三種『無為』中，選取第二種作為小乘佛教的涅槃，第三種與之前的儒家和道家相同，從『有』進入『無』，用以說明『有』和『無』涵蓋了世間和出世間。因為『無餘』就是出世間的法。
而論中說：在『有』和『無』之外，另有一種微妙的道，這種道超越了『有』和『無』，稱之為涅槃。請考察這微妙的道的本體，如果它確實是『有』，雖然微妙但並非『無』。如果它確實是『無』，『無』就是沒有差別，沒有差別就進入了『無』的境界。總括起來研究它，沒有哪一種『有』不同於『無』，也沒有哪一種『無』不同於『有』，這不是很明顯嗎？最初的四句引用了前面的違背經文的說法，請考察正是爲了駁難。下面的意思是說，微妙的道的本體畢竟是存在的，本體雖然玄妙但不能說是『無』，這樣就進入了『有』的境界。下面的『無』的例子與此相同。總括起來下面正是爲了顯示所包含的內容。意思是說，微妙的本體既不是『有』，也不是『無』。不是『有』就是『無』，不是『無』就是『有』。沒有見過一種法在『有』之外而又不是『無』的。下一句是舉例說明。
而（你）說：在『有』和『無』之外，另有一種微妙的道，既不是『有』，也不是『無』，稱之為涅槃。我聽過這種說法了，但還沒有領會於心啊！耳朵雖然聽到了這種說法，但心裡還沒有領悟其中的道理。
【English Translation】 English version: Delving into it, whether in the realm of the unseen or the manifest, things exist that are vast and expansive, strange and peculiar, cunning and deceitful, bizarre and monstrous, beautiful and ugly in diverse forms, immense and minute in myriad shapes, none of which is not 'being' (有). Since 'being' arises from 'non-being' (無), it must inevitably proceed from 'being' to 'non-being'. A thousand forms and ten thousand appearances ultimately return to 'non-being'. Therefore, what follows will correctly elucidate the universal encompassing. The phrase '恢恑' is taken from Zhuangzi's writings. The Confucian and Taoist schools above have similar discussions. He Yan, Wang Bi, and other Confucian scholars each have elaborations and explanations, which are called pure conversations (清談). These matters are recorded in books such as the Comprehensive Mirror for Aid in Governance (通鑑). Therefore, the present author poses a hypothetical question and then dismisses it.
The scriptures say: 'The two dharmas of 'being' and 'non-being' encompass all dharmas.' It also speaks of the three 'unconditioned' (無為): the unconditioned of space (虛空無為), the unconditioned of the cessation of wisdom-related conditions (數緣盡無為), and the unconditioned of the cessation of non-wisdom-related conditions (非數緣盡無為). 'Wisdom' (數) refers to prajna (慧), 'conditions' (緣) are the cessation of prajna, which is nirvana (滅諦). It refers to using undefiled wisdom to sever all afflictions and realize the truth of nirvana. The Tang dynasty translation calls it 'selective cessation unconditioned' (擇滅無為). 'Cessation of non-wisdom-related conditions' refers to the natural extinction of various dharmas due to the separation of conditions. Among these three 'unconditioned', the second is chosen as the nirvana of Hinayana Buddhism, and the third is the same as the previous Confucian and Taoist schools, entering 'non-being' from 'being', to explain that 'being' and 'non-being' encompass the mundane and supramundane. Because 'without remainder' (無餘) is the supramundane dharma.
And the treatise says: 'Beyond 'being' and 'non-being', there is another subtle path, which transcends 'being' and 'non-being', called nirvana.' Please examine the essence (本) of this subtle path. If it is indeed 'being', although subtle, it is not 'non-being'. If it is indeed 'non-being', 'non-being' is without difference, and without difference, it enters the realm of 'non-being'. To summarize and investigate it, there is no 'being' that is different from 'non-being', and there is no 'non-being' that is different from 'being'. Is this not clear? The first four sentences quote the previous statements that contradict the scriptures. Please examine, it is precisely for refutation. The meaning below is that the essence of the subtle path ultimately exists. Although the essence is profound, it cannot be said to be 'non-being', and thus it enters the realm of 'being'. The example of 'non-being' below is the same. To summarize, what follows is precisely to reveal what is contained. The meaning is that the subtle essence is neither 'being' nor 'non-being'. Not 'being' is 'non-being', and not 'non-being' is 'being'. I have never seen a dharma outside of 'being' that is not 'non-being'. The next sentence is an illustrative example.
And (you) say: 'Beyond 'being' and 'non-being', there is another subtle path, which is neither 'being' nor 'non-being', called nirvana.' I have heard this saying, but it has not yet resonated in my heart! Although my ears have heard this saying, my mind has not yet understood the principle within it.
吾聞其語矣論語文。
超境第五 十演之三也。超越也。境即有無六塵之境。徴中欲以有無統收涅槃。演中指二法俗諦之境。涅槃真諦卓然超越。以破外宗有無之見。
無名曰。有無之數誠以無法不該。理無不統(縱)然其所統俗諦而已(奪) 有無雖寬收一切。但不收真諦。
經曰。真諦何耶。涅槃道是。俗諦何耶。有無法是 義引大品。道樹品云。菩薩以世諦故。示眾生若有若無。非以第一義諦。問以屬體二諦迢。然仁王經亦以有無為俗諦。
何則有者有于無。無者無于有。有無所以稱有。無有所以稱無。然則有生於無。無生於有。離有無無離無無有。有無相生。其猶高下相傾。有高必有下。有下必有高矣 初二句明二法相因。由有于無所以是有。下句例之。次二句承前以生二名。然則下順明相待兩成。離有下反顯不待皆非。有無相生下引類。非直有無相待。至於高下是非前後等皆然也。
然則有無雖殊俱未免於有也。此乃言象之所以形(興)是非之所以生(起)豈足以統夫幽極而擬夫神道者乎 初二句中對有之時無乃是無。若二法相待因有生無。皆是緣有也。此乃下隨有無而興言象。依言象而起是非。豈足明於幽深神妙之道乎。
是以論稱出有無者。良以有無之數止乎六
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 我聽說了關於語言文字的討論。
《超境第五》是《十演》的第三部分。超，是超越的意思。境，指有和無、六塵（色、聲、香、味、觸、法）的境界。提問者想要用有和無來統攝涅槃，而《十演》中指的是二法（名和色）俗諦的境界。涅槃真諦卓然超越，用來破斥外道宗派關於有和無的見解。
無名問道：『有和無這兩個概念，確實沒有什麼事物不在其中，道理上也沒有什麼不能統攝。』（回答：）『然而它們所統攝的只是俗諦而已。』有和無雖然寬泛，可以涵蓋一切，但不能涵蓋真諦。
經中說：『什麼是真諦呢？涅槃之道就是。什麼是俗諦呢？有法和無法就是。』這裡引用《大品般若經》的《道樹品》中的話說：『菩薩因為世俗諦的緣故，向眾生顯示有或者無，而不是用第一義諦。』提問者用本體和作用來區分二諦，非常明顯。《仁王經》也用有和無作為俗諦。
為什麼這樣說呢？因為『有』是相對於『無』而存在的，『無』是相對於『有』而存在的。因為有『無』，所以才能稱之為『有』；因為沒有『有』，所以才能稱之為『無』。這樣看來，『有』產生於『無』，『無』產生於『有』。離開『有』就沒有『無』，離開『無』就沒有『有』。『有』和『無』相互依存，就像高和下相互傾斜一樣，有了高就一定有下，有了下就一定有高。』前面兩句說明二法相互依存，因為相對於『無』，所以才會有『有』。下面一句用類似的方法說明。再下面兩句承接前面的意思，說明『有』和『無』這兩個名稱的產生。『然則』之後順著前面的意思說明相互對待才能成立。『離有』之後反過來顯示不相互對待就都不成立。『有無相生』之後用類比來說明，不僅僅是『有』和『無』相互對待，像高和下、是和非、前和后等等都是這樣。
這樣看來，『有』和『無』雖然不同，但都沒有超出『有』的範圍。這正是言語和表象產生的原因，是非對錯產生的原因，怎麼能夠用來統攝幽深玄妙的道理，並用來比擬神奇的道呢？』前面兩句中，當說『有』的時候，『無』就是『無』。如果二法相互對待，因為『有』而產生『無』，那麼都是依附於『有』的。『此乃』之後，隨著『有』和『無』而產生言語和表象，依靠言語和表象而產生是非對錯，怎麼能夠明白幽深神妙的道呢？
因此，《論》中說超出『有』和『無』，是因為『有』和『無』的範圍只到六……
【English Translation】 English version: I have heard the discussion about language and words.
『Transcending the Realm Fifth』 is the third part of 『Ten Evolutions』. 『Transcending』 means to surpass. 『Realm』 refers to the realm of existence and non-existence, the six sense objects (form, sound, smell, taste, touch, and dharma). The questioner wants to use existence and non-existence to encompass Nirvana, while 『Ten Evolutions』 refers to the realm of the two dharmas (name and form), the conventional truth (Samvriti-satya). Nirvana, the ultimate truth (Paramartha-satya), stands distinctly transcendent, used to refute the views of externalist schools regarding existence and non-existence.
An unnamed person asked: 『Indeed, the concepts of existence and non-existence seem to encompass everything, and there is nothing that their principles cannot govern.』 (The answer:) 『However, they only govern the conventional truth.』 Although existence and non-existence are broad and can cover everything, they cannot cover the ultimate truth.
The Sutra says: 『What is the ultimate truth? It is the path of Nirvana. What is the conventional truth? It is the existence and non-existence of dharmas.』 This quotes the 『Tree of Enlightenment』 chapter from the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra: 『Bodhisattvas, for the sake of conventional truth, show beings existence or non-existence, but not with the ultimate truth.』 The questioner clearly distinguishes the two truths by their substance and function. The Benevolent King Sutra also uses existence and non-existence as the conventional truth.
Why is this so? Because 『existence』 exists in relation to 『non-existence』, and 『non-existence』 exists in relation to 『existence』. Because there is 『non-existence』, it can be called 『existence』; because there is no 『existence』, it can be called 『non-existence』. Thus, 『existence』 arises from 『non-existence』, and 『non-existence』 arises from 『existence』. Without 『existence』, there is no 『non-existence』; without 『non-existence』, there is no 『existence』. 『Existence』 and 『non-existence』 are interdependent, like high and low leaning on each other. Where there is high, there must be low; where there is low, there must be high.』 The first two sentences explain that the two dharmas are interdependent; because of 『non-existence』, there is 『existence』. The next sentence explains it in a similar way. The next two sentences follow the previous meaning, explaining the arising of the names 『existence』 and 『non-existence』. 『Thus』 then follows the previous meaning, explaining that they can only be established by mutual dependence. 『Without existence』 then conversely shows that they cannot be established without mutual dependence. 『Existence and non-existence arise together』 then uses analogy to explain that it is not only 『existence』 and 『non-existence』 that are interdependent, but also high and low, right and wrong, before and after, and so on.
Thus, although 『existence』 and 『non-existence』 are different, neither escapes the scope of 『existence』. This is the reason why language and appearances arise, and why right and wrong arise. How can they be sufficient to encompass the profound and mysterious principles, and to compare with the miraculous Dao?』 In the first two sentences, when 『existence』 is spoken of, 『non-existence』 is 『non-existence』. If the two dharmas are interdependent, and 『non-existence』 arises from 『existence』, then they are both dependent on 『existence』. 『This is why』 then, following 『existence』 and 『non-existence』, language and appearances arise, and relying on language and appearances, right and wrong arise. How can one understand the profound and mysterious Dao?
Therefore, the Treatise says to go beyond 『existence』 and 『non-existence』, because the scope of 『existence』 and 『non-existence』 only reaches the six…
境之內。六境之內非涅槃之宅。故借出以祛(遣)之 初句牒前位體中結文。六境者。古譯六塵為六境。皆緣生之事形。兆入有緣散入無。豈涅槃之居宅。故假借出之言以顯高邁。
庶希道之流。彷彿幽途托情絕域。得意亡言體其非有非無。豈曰有無之外別有一有而可稱哉 彷彿者。相似比擬也。猶言仿法玄道而悟。如何法耶。一相絕。二言亡。不可守有無之言而隔玄悟。體其下但可體究其非有非無。不生知覺自與玄會。若計有無之外。別有涅槃復入有境。豈能超之。
經曰。三無為者。蓋是群生紛繞。生乎篤(厚)患。篤患之尤(甚)莫先於有。絕有之稱莫先於無。故借無以明其非有。明其非有。非謂無也 經即羅什所譯仁王也。紛繞煩惱也。亦業也。篤患生死也。有謂三有。有為有漏故。絕有下謂欲引出有為。則無為第一。此意佛說無為。令群生息有為之患。爾借無下但假借無為之名。以引著有之物。令悟非有。故放光云。若無有為亦無無為等。非謂非有是斷無之無。恐儒老之流計有無遍攝一切。謂涅槃亦無之所攝。曲引佛經有為無為。以為類例。涅槃既是無為亦合無攝。故合無攝。故設此難以揀之。一揀涅槃非有無攝。二揀無為之無。非二家所計有無之無。
搜(尋)玄第六 九折之三也。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
在六境之內。六境之內不是涅槃（Nirvana，解脫）的居所。所以借用『出』這個概念來去除（遣除）它。初句是承接前文『位體』中的結論。六境，古譯將六塵稱為六境，都是因緣而生的事物形態，兆示著進入『有』的因緣，散入『無』的因緣。怎麼會是涅槃的居所呢？所以假借『出』這個說法來彰顯其高遠超脫。 希望求道的人，能夠相似地、彷彿地在幽深的小路上，將情感寄託在超脫塵世的境界，領悟到得意忘言的境界，體會到非有非無的真諦。難道說在『有』和『無』之外，還存在一個可以稱之為『有』的東西嗎？彷彿，是相似比擬的意思。就像說傚法玄妙的道而領悟。如何傚法呢？一是斷絕一切表相，二是忘卻一切言語。不能固守『有』或『無』的言論而阻隔了玄妙的領悟。『體其』以下，只能體會探究那非有非無的境界，不生起任何知覺，自然與玄妙相會。如果認為在『有』和『無』之外，還存在一個涅槃，那就又進入了『有』的境界，又怎麼能超越呢？ 經書上說：『三無為』，是因為眾生被煩惱所纏繞，產生深厚的憂患。憂患之中，最嚴重的莫過於『有』。斷絕『有』的說法，沒有比『無』更合適的了。所以借用『無』來表明它不是『有』。表明它不是『有』，並不是說它就是『無』。』經書指的是鳩摩羅什（Kumarajiva）翻譯的《仁王經》。紛繞，是煩惱的意思，也是業的意思。篤患，是生死的意思。『有』指的是三有，是有為有漏的。『絕有』以下，是說想要引出有為，那麼無為就是第一位的。這個意思是佛說無為，是爲了讓眾生止息有為的憂患。而『借無』以下，只是假借無為的名義，來引導執著于『有』的事物，使他們領悟到非有。所以《放光經》說，如果沒有有為，也就沒有無為等等。『非謂非有』並不是斷滅的『無』。恐怕儒家和道家之流認為『有』和『無』涵蓋了一切，認為涅槃也被『無』所涵蓋，所以曲解佛經中的有為和無為，作為類比的例子。涅槃既然是無為，也應該被『無』所涵蓋。所以設定這個難題來辨別。一是辨別涅槃不是『有』或『無』所涵蓋的，二是辨別無為的『無』，不是儒家和道家所認為的『有』或『無』的『無』。 搜玄第六，是九折中的第三折。
【English Translation】 English version:
Within the six realms (six sense objects). The six realms are not the abode of Nirvana (liberation). Therefore, the concept of 'going beyond' is borrowed to dispel (eliminate) them. The first sentence is a conclusion from the previous 'positional essence'. The six realms, in ancient translations, the six dusts are called the six realms, all of which are forms of things arising from conditions, indicating the causes of entering 'existence', and scattering into the causes of 'non-existence'. How could they be the abode of Nirvana? Therefore, the saying of 'going beyond' is borrowed to highlight its loftiness and transcendence. It is hoped that those who seek the Way can similarly and vaguely, on the deep path, entrust their emotions to a realm beyond the mundane, comprehend the state of 'forgetting words upon attaining the meaning', and realize the true meaning of neither existence nor non-existence. Could it be said that outside of 'existence' and 'non-existence', there exists something that can be called 'existence'? 'Vaguely' means similar analogy. It's like saying to emulate the profound Way and awaken. How to emulate? First, sever all appearances; second, forget all words. One cannot cling to the words of 'existence' or 'non-existence' and block the profound understanding. 'Realize its' below, one can only comprehend and explore the realm of neither existence nor non-existence, without arising any perception, naturally meeting with the profound. If one thinks that outside of 'existence' and 'non-existence', there is still a Nirvana, then one enters the realm of 'existence' again, how can one transcend it? The scripture says: 'The three unconditioned (asamkhata) states' are because sentient beings are entangled in afflictions, producing deep suffering. Among sufferings, the most serious is none other than 'existence'. There is no more suitable way to cut off 'existence' than 'non-existence'. Therefore, 'non-existence' is borrowed to indicate that it is not 'existence'. To indicate that it is not 'existence' does not mean that it is 'non-existence'.' The scripture refers to the 'Benevolent King Sutra' translated by Kumarajiva. 'Entangled' means afflictions, and also means karma. 'Deep suffering' means birth and death. 'Existence' refers to the three existences, which are conditioned and defiled. 'Cutting off existence' below means wanting to bring out the unconditioned, then the unconditioned is the first. This means that the Buddha speaks of the unconditioned in order to let sentient beings stop the suffering of the conditioned. And 'borrowing non-existence' below is just borrowing the name of the unconditioned to guide things that are attached to 'existence', so that they can realize non-existence. Therefore, the 'Radiant Light Sutra' says that if there is no conditioned, there is no unconditioned, and so on. 'Not meaning non-existence' is not the annihilation of 'non-existence'. Fearing that Confucian and Taoist schools of thought believe that 'existence' and 'non-existence' encompass everything, and that Nirvana is also encompassed by 'non-existence', they distort the conditioned and unconditioned in Buddhist scriptures as examples of analogy. Since Nirvana is unconditioned, it should also be encompassed by 'non-existence'. Therefore, this difficult question is set up to distinguish. First, to distinguish that Nirvana is not encompassed by 'existence' or 'non-existence', and second, to distinguish that the 'non-existence' of the unconditioned is not the 'non-existence' of 'existence' or 'non-existence' as understood by Confucianism and Taoism. Searching for the Profound Sixth, is the third of the nine folds.
亦承前起。至下可知。
有名曰。論旨云。涅槃既不出有無又。不在有無 初句敘前豈。曰有無之外等。次句敘前良以有無等。
不在有無則不可於有無得之矣(一也)不出有無則不可以離有無求之矣(二也)求之無所便應都無(三也) 二所不得當求無所。究竟無體徒說何為。
然復不無其道。其道不無則幽途可尋。所以千聖同轍。未嘗虛返(歸)者也 初明玄體非斷。所以千聖同歸。必有實理。
其道既存而曰不出不在。必有異旨。可得聞乎 若斷可許不在不出。既存何云雙離。
妙存第七 十演之四也。不出不在曰妙。體非斷絕曰存。亦示無住之深。
無名曰。夫言由名起名以相生。相因可相無相無名。無名無說。無說無聞 初三句舉妄。后三句顯真。可相者。相由心起。心於相上印可分別。故言可相猶言相由心現。
經曰。涅槃非法非非法。無聞無說非心所知 本經二十一云。略謂涅槃非相非不相。非物非不物等。無聞無謂等亦凈名文。理事善惡等皆名為法。今順論意。且以有無為法。非法不在也。非非法不出也。不出不在無說也。無說則無聞。無聞則無知也。
吾何敢言。而子欲聞之耶 此由名家執出在之名而折非出非在之妙。愿樂欲聞。故於答前先舉
妙體之玄。以拂聞相。令忘名會旨。
雖然善吉有言。眾生若能以無心而受。無聽而聽者。吾當以無言言之。庶述其言。亦可以言也 義引大品須菩提告釋提桓因諸天子之意。非正文也。事如前引。予以論勘經。論主引用實有多式。或引正文。或取義引之。或出經名。或泛舉之。或但引經中人名。或合集上下字文。或合集兩經引之。或略或詳。細推自見。
凈名曰。不離煩惱而得涅槃。天女曰。不出魔界而入佛界 彼經弟子品云。不斷煩惱而入涅槃。天女下即寶女所問經第四。寶女偈答舍利弗云。如魔之境界。佛境界。則平等相應為一類。以是印見印。
然則玄道在乎妙悟。妙悟在於即真。即真則有無齊觀。齊觀則彼己莫二 初句于道貴悟。如何悟耶。即妄而真故。如前云。不離煩惱得涅槃等。次句既不離緣而即真。觀色之時莫非見空。觀空之時莫非見色。故云齊觀。彼己目心境。心境一如。故云莫二。
所以天地與我同根。萬物與我一體 天地萬物皆境也。我即心也。既云同根一體。則本無二。文似莊子。
同我則非復有無。異我則乖于會通 同我者。心境無異亦理事冥同。非復有無者。有無之事泯絕也。異我下心境理事兩殊。不能會證冥同也。詳此二句。唯同唯異皆非。亦同亦異
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 妙體之玄奧，在於通過拂塵的示現來領悟真諦，從而忘卻名相，領會佛法的旨歸。
雖然善吉（Subhuti，須菩提，佛陀的十大弟子之一，以解空第一著稱）曾說，眾生如果能以無心的狀態來接受，以不執著于聽聞的方式來聽聞，我便以無言的方式來向他們說法。姑且敘述他的話，也可以用言語來表達。 （義引自《大品般若經》，是須菩提告誡釋提桓因（Śakra devānām Indra，帝釋天）諸天子之意，並非經文正文。事情如前面所引用。論主在論述經典時，引用方式有很多種，或引用正文，或提取其義理，或只提經名，或泛泛而舉，或只引用經中的人名，或將上下文字句合併，或將兩部經文合併引用，或簡略或詳細，仔細推敲便可明白。）
維摩詰（Vimalakīrti）說：『不離開煩惱而證得涅槃（Nirvana，佛教修行的最終目標，指從輪迴中解脫）。』天女說：『不超出魔的境界而進入佛的境界。』（《維摩詰所說經·弟子品》中說：『不斷煩惱而入涅槃。』天女所說出自《寶女所問經》第四品，寶女以偈頌回答舍利弗（Śāriputra，佛陀十大弟子之一，以智慧第一著稱）說：『如魔之境界，佛之境界，則平等相應為一類。』以此作為印證。）
如此說來，玄妙的佛道在於精妙的領悟，精妙的領悟在於當下即是真如。當下即是真如，那麼有和無就可以平等看待；平等看待，那麼彼和己就沒有差別。（第一句強調佛道貴在領悟。如何領悟呢？即從虛妄中認識真如，如前面所說『不離開煩惱而證得涅槃』等等。第二句既然不離因緣而當下即是真如，那麼觀色之時無不是見空，觀空之時無不是見色，所以說平等看待。彼己指的是心、境。心境一如，所以說沒有差別。）
所以天地與我同根，萬物與我一體。（天地萬物都是外境，我就是內心。既然說是同根一體，那麼本來就沒有差別。文句類似莊子的思想。）
與我相同，那就沒有有和無的對立；與我相異，那就違背了融會貫通的道理。（與我相同，指心境沒有差異，事和理完全相同，『非復有無』指有無的對立消失了。『異我』指心境、事理兩者不同，不能融會貫通。詳細分析這兩句，無論是相同還是相異都不對，亦同亦異。）
【English Translation】 English version The mystery of the wondrous essence lies in perceiving the truth through the manifestation of the whisk, thereby forgetting names and forms and comprehending the ultimate meaning of the Dharma.
Although Subhuti (Śūnyatāgranin, foremost in understanding emptiness) said, 'If sentient beings can receive with a mind free from attachment and listen without clinging to hearing, then I will teach them with no words.' Let us attempt to describe his words, which can also be expressed through language. (This meaning is drawn from the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra, where Subhuti advises Śakra devānām Indra and the gods, and is not the exact text. The matter is as previously cited. When discussing scriptures, commentators use various methods of citation: quoting the exact text, extracting the meaning, mentioning only the sutra name, making general references, citing only the names of people in the sutra, combining phrases from different parts of the text, combining citations from two sutras, or being brief or detailed. Careful examination will reveal these differences.)
Vimalakīrti said, 'Without leaving afflictions, one attains Nirvana (liberation from the cycle of rebirth).' A goddess said, 'Without going beyond the realm of Mara (demon), one enters the realm of Buddha.' (The Vimalakirti Sutra, in the 'Disciples' chapter, states, 'Without ceasing afflictions, one enters Nirvana.' The goddess's statement comes from the fourth chapter of the Srimati-Brahmi-Devi-Pariprccha Sutra, where the goddess answers Śāriputra in verse, saying, 'The realm of Mara and the realm of Buddha are equal and correspond as one category.' This serves as a seal of confirmation.)
Therefore, the profound Dao lies in wondrous enlightenment, and wondrous enlightenment lies in the immediate realization of Suchness (Tathata, true nature). With the immediate realization of Suchness, existence and non-existence can be viewed equally; with equal viewing, there is no difference between self and other. (The first sentence emphasizes that the Dao values enlightenment. How does one become enlightened? By recognizing the true nature from illusion, as mentioned earlier, 'Without leaving afflictions, one attains Nirvana,' etc. The second sentence states that since one immediately realizes Suchness without separating from conditions, then when observing form, one is invariably seeing emptiness, and when observing emptiness, one is invariably seeing form. Therefore, they are viewed equally. 'Self' and 'other' refer to mind and environment. Mind and environment are one, so there is no difference.)
Therefore, heaven and earth share the same root with me, and all things are one body with me. (Heaven, earth, and all things are external environments, and 'I' is the mind. Since it is said that they share the same root and are one body, then there is originally no difference. The wording is similar to Zhuangzi's thought.)
Being the same as me, there is no longer the opposition of existence and non-existence; being different from me, one deviates from the principle of harmonious understanding. (Being the same as me means that there is no difference between mind and environment, and phenomena and principle are completely identical. 'No longer existence and non-existence' means that the opposition of existence and non-existence disappears. 'Different from me' means that mind and environment, phenomena and principle are different, and one cannot harmoniously realize their complete identity. Analyzing these two sentences in detail, neither being the same nor being different is correct; both being the same and being different are.)
方離諸過。出在兩成。何者。由異故事理相違。所以不在。今若唯同非復有無。則不在之旨不成。由同故事理相即。所以不出。今若唯異乖于會通。不出之旨不成。以涅槃是理有無屬事。故相躡各有二過。可知。
所以不出不在而道存乎其間矣。
何則夫至人虛心冥照理無不統。懷六合于胸中。而靈鑒有餘。鏡萬有于方寸。而其神常虛 初二句泛明一智皆虛冥也。次二句示正智照理。四方上下名為六合。后二句示后智達事。鏡萬下謂萬有于方寸而無慮焉。故云常虛。此辯智玄下明證妙。
至(竟)能拔玄根于未始。即群動以靜心。恬淡淵默妙契自然 至能下承前以明。玄根喻真拔喻于證。未始二意。一未猶無也。理無始故智始會時非照今有。二智雖極真未始照。故如前云虛心等。群動俗也。權應之時初無應相故云靜心。后二句如次成上二智無相。自然者。感而後應不加功力。起信云。自然而有不思議業。能現十方利益眾生。
所以處有不有。居無不無。居無不無故不無于無。處有不有故不有于有。故能不出有無。而不在有無者也 所以下略至人二字。初二句承前釋成。處有居無明不出也。不有不無明不在也。次四句躡前雙示不住。故能下結成。
然則法無有無之相。聖無有無之知。聖
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
遠離各種過失。既不屬於『兩成』（兩種極端），也不屬於『有』和『無』。為什麼呢？如果因為不同的故事導致理論相互違背，那麼它就不存在。如果現在只有相同的故事，不再有『有』和『無』的對立，那麼『不存在』的宗旨就不能成立。如果因為相同的故事導致理論相互一致，那麼它就不會出現。如果現在只有差異，就違背了會通融合的原則，那麼『不出現』的宗旨就不能成立。因為涅槃是真理，而『有』和『無』屬於現象，所以相互關聯各有兩種過失，這是可以理解的。
因此，既不出現，也不存在，而真理存在於兩者之間。
為什麼這樣說呢？達到極致的人虛懷若谷，以冥寂之心照亮一切，沒有什麼不能統攝。胸懷宇宙，而靈明的智慧還有餘地；在方寸之間映照萬物，而他的精神始終保持虛靜。最初兩句概括地說明根本智慧都是虛空寂靜的。接著兩句揭示正智照亮真理。四方上下稱為六合。後面兩句揭示后得智通達現象。『鏡萬有于方寸』是指在方寸之間映照萬物而沒有憂慮，所以說『常虛』。這裡通過辨析智慧的玄妙來證明妙理。
達到極致的人能夠從『未始』（沒有開始）之處拔除玄妙的根源，用寂靜的心來對待一切活動，恬淡、淵深、寂靜，微妙地契合自然。『至能』以下承接前面來闡明。『玄根』比喻真理，『拔』比喻證悟。『未始』有兩種含義：一是『未』就是『無』的意思，真理沒有開始，所以智慧開始會合時並非照見現在才有的東西；二是智慧即使達到極致，也並非從一開始就照見，所以像前面所說的『虛心』等等。『群動』指世俗的活動。在權宜應變的時候，最初沒有應對的相狀，所以說『靜心』。後面兩句依次成就了上面所說的兩種智慧的無相。『自然』是指感應之後才有所迴應，不加任何功力。《起信論》說：『自然而有不可思議的業，能夠顯現十方利益眾生。』
因此，處於『有』而不執著于『有』，處於『無』而不執著于『無』。處於『無』而不執著于『無』，所以不會在『無』中消失；處於『有』而不執著于『有』，所以不會在『有』中存在。所以能夠不出現於『有』和『無』，也不存在於『有』和『無』之間。『所以』以下省略了『至人』二字。最初兩句承接前面解釋成就。處於『有』，處於『無』，說明不出現。不執著于『有』，不執著于『無』，說明不存在。接著四句承接前面，雙重地顯示不住著。『故能』以下總結成就。
如此說來，法沒有『有』和『無』的相狀，聖人沒有『有』和『無』的知見。聖人
【English Translation】 English version:
It is apart from all faults. It neither belongs to the 'two extremes' (two accomplishments) nor to 'existence' and 'non-existence'. Why? If, due to different stories, the theories contradict each other, then it does not exist. If now there are only the same stories, and there is no longer the opposition of 'existence' and 'non-existence', then the principle of 'non-existence' cannot be established. If, due to the same stories, the theories are consistent with each other, then it does not appear. If now there is only difference, it violates the principle of convergence and integration, then the principle of 'non-appearance' cannot be established. Because Nirvana (extinction) is truth, while 'existence' and 'non-existence' belong to phenomena, therefore, they are related to each other and each has two faults, which can be understood.
Therefore, it neither appears nor exists, but the truth exists between the two.
Why is this said? Those who reach the ultimate have an empty mind and illuminate everything with silent contemplation, and there is nothing that cannot be encompassed. They hold the universe (six directions) in their hearts, and their spiritual wisdom has surplus; they reflect all things in an inch of space, and their spirit always remains empty. The first two sentences generally explain that fundamental wisdom is all empty and silent. The next two sentences reveal that right wisdom illuminates the truth. The four directions, up and down, are called the six directions. The last two sentences reveal that subsequent wisdom understands phenomena. 'Reflecting all things in an inch of space' means reflecting all things in an inch of space without worry, so it is said 'always empty'. Here, the subtlety of wisdom is demonstrated through the analysis of its profundity.
Those who reach the ultimate can uproot the mysterious root from the 'unoriginated' (no beginning), treat all activities with a quiet mind, be tranquil, profound, and silent, and subtly correspond to nature. 'To be able to' below continues from the previous to clarify. 'Mysterious root' is a metaphor for truth, 'uprooting' is a metaphor for realization. 'Unoriginated' has two meanings: first, 'un' means 'non-existence', truth has no beginning, so when wisdom begins to converge, it does not illuminate something that only exists now; second, even if wisdom reaches the ultimate, it does not illuminate from the beginning, so like the 'empty mind' mentioned earlier, and so on. 'All activities' refers to worldly activities. In expedient responses, there is initially no appearance of response, so it is said 'quiet mind'. The last two sentences successively accomplish the non-appearance of the two wisdoms mentioned above. 'Nature' means responding after being sensed, without adding any effort. The Awakening of Faith says: 'Naturally there are inconceivable deeds that can manifest the benefits of the ten directions to sentient beings.'
Therefore, being in 'existence' without being attached to 'existence', being in 'non-existence' without being attached to 'non-existence'. Being in 'non-existence' without being attached to 'non-existence', so it will not disappear in 'non-existence'; being in 'existence' without being attached to 'existence', so it will not exist in 'existence'. Therefore, it can neither appear in 'existence' and 'non-existence', nor exist between 'existence' and 'non-existence'. 'Therefore' below omits the words 'those who reach the ultimate'. The first two sentences continue from the previous to explain the accomplishment. Being in 'existence', being in 'non-existence', explains non-appearance. Not being attached to 'existence', not being attached to 'non-existence', explains non-existence. The next four sentences continue from the previous, doubly showing non-attachment. 'Therefore able' below summarizes the accomplishment.
In this way, the Dharma (law) has no appearance of 'existence' and 'non-existence', and the sage has no knowledge of 'existence' and 'non-existence'. The sage
無有無之知。則無心於內法。無有無之相則無數(相)于外。于外無數于內無心。此彼寂滅物(境)我心冥一。怕爾無眹乃曰涅槃。涅槃若此圖度絕矣 初二句顯心境無相。次四句明心境兩亡。次四句心境冥一。怕爾下結離心思。圖度思慮也。
豈容責之於有無之內。又可徴之於有無之外耶。
難差第八 九折之四也。此亦承前心境不二之妙。以難三乘等修證之差。
有名曰。涅槃既絕圖度之域。則超六境之外。不出不在而玄道獨存。斯則窮理盡性。究竟之道妙一無差。理其然矣。通敘前理。窮理盡性語出周易。彼云。窮理盡性以至於命。理其然者。許可其理。
而放光云。三乘之道皆因無為。而有差別 即二十四中之文。亦少不同義則無異。金剛亦云。一切賢聖法皆因等(云云)。
佛言。我昔為菩薩名曰儒童。于然燈佛所。已入涅槃。儒童菩薩時於七住獲無生忍。進修三位 緣起如本行說。詳意儒童時居七住。依無生忍見無生理。名入涅槃。折意以既得涅槃。謂究竟無修。如何復修后三住乎。古譯十地亦名十住。
若涅槃一也。則不應有三。如其有三則非究竟。究竟之道而有升降之殊。眾經異說何以取中耶 初四句難三乘有差。以三一互違故非究竟。則無常也。次二句躡前
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：對『有』和『無』的認知都消失時，內心便不再執著于內在的法。當『有』和『無』的表象都不存在時，外在世界也就不再有任何現象（相）的束縛。對外在世界沒有現象的執著，對內在世界沒有心的執著，此時，外在世界、內在自我與心融為一體，達到一種難以言說的境界，這便是所謂的涅槃。如果涅槃可以用圖度（思慮）來衡量，那就完全錯了。前兩句闡明心和境都沒有固定的表象。接下來的四句說明心和境都消失了。再接下來的四句說明心和境融為一體。最後四句總結說，涅槃是超越思慮的境界。圖度指的是思慮。 難道可以在『有』和『無』的範疇內去追究它嗎？又怎麼能在『有』和『無』的範疇之外去尋找它呢？ 難差第八，是九折中的第四個問題。這部分延續了之前心境不二的精妙思想，用來質疑三乘（聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘）在修行和證悟上的差異。 有人說：『涅槃既然超越了圖度（思慮）的領域，那麼就超越了六境（色、聲、香、味、觸、法）之外，既不屬於存在，也不屬於不存在，玄妙的道獨自存在。』這樣就達到了窮究真理、徹底瞭解本性的境界，究竟之道是如此的精妙而沒有差別。這個道理是這樣的。這裡是對前面道理的總結。『窮理盡性』出自《周易》，其中說：『窮理盡性以至於命』。『理其然者』，是認可這個道理的意思。 而《放光經》中說：『三乘之道都是因為無為而產生差別。』這是二十四品中的內容，雖然文字略有不同，但意思沒有差別。《金剛經》也說：『一切賢聖法都是因為平等（等等）。』 佛說：『我過去作為菩薩，名叫儒童（Sumedha），在燃燈佛（Dipamkara Buddha）那裡，就已經進入了涅槃。』儒童菩薩在七住位（第七個菩薩階位）時獲得了無生忍（Anutpattika-dharma-kshanti），並繼續修行了三個位次。緣起的原因如《本行經》所說。詳細的意思是，儒童在七住位時，依靠無生忍見證了沒有生滅的真理，所以說進入了涅槃。這裡要反駁的是，如果已經證得了涅槃，就意味著究竟圓滿，不再需要修行，那麼又怎麼會繼續修行後面的三個位次呢？古譯的十地也叫做十住。 如果涅槃是唯一的，就不應該有三乘的差別。如果真的有三乘的差別，那就不是究竟圓滿。如果究竟之道有高低之分，那麼眾多經典的不同說法，我們又該如何取捨呢？前四句質疑三乘的差別，因為三乘的『一』和『異』相互矛盾，所以不是究竟。那就意味著無常。接下來的兩句承接前面的觀點。
【English Translation】 English version: When the knowledge of 'being' and 'non-being' both cease to exist, the mind no longer clings to internal dharmas. When the appearance of 'being' and 'non-being' are both absent, the external world is also free from the bondage of any phenomena (lakshana). Without attachment to phenomena in the external world, and without attachment to the mind in the internal world, at this moment, the external world, the internal self, and the mind merge into one, reaching an indescribable state, which is called Nirvana. If Nirvana can be measured by thought (vitarka), then it is completely wrong. The first two sentences clarify that neither the mind nor the environment has a fixed appearance. The next four sentences explain that both the mind and the environment disappear. The next four sentences explain that the mind and the environment merge into one. The last four sentences conclude that Nirvana is a state beyond thought. 'Tudu' refers to thought. How can it be investigated within the scope of 'being' and 'non-being'? And how can it be sought outside the scope of 'being' and 'non-being'? Difficulty in Differentiation, the Eighth, is the fourth question in the Nine Refutations. This part continues the previous subtle idea of the non-duality of mind and environment, used to question the differences in practice and enlightenment among the Three Vehicles (Shravakayana, Pratyekabuddhayana, Bodhisattvayana). Someone says: 'Since Nirvana transcends the realm of thought (tudu), then it transcends the six realms (rupa, shabda, gandha, rasa, sparsa, dharma), neither belonging to existence nor non-existence, the profound Dao exists alone.' This achieves the realm of thoroughly investigating the truth and completely understanding one's nature, the ultimate Dao is so subtle and without difference. This is the principle. This is a summary of the previous principle. 'Exhausting the principles and fulfilling the nature' comes from the Book of Changes (Zhou Yi), which says: 'Exhausting the principles and fulfilling the nature to the point of destiny.' 'Li qi ran zhe' means to acknowledge this principle. And the Sutra of the Emission of Light (Fang Guang Jing) says: 'The paths of the Three Vehicles all arise from non-action (wuwei) and have differences.' This is the content of the twenty-fourth chapter, although the words are slightly different, the meaning is the same. The Diamond Sutra (Vajracchedika Prajnaparamita Sutra) also says: 'All the laws of the wise and holy are due to equality (etc.).' The Buddha said: 'In the past, as a Bodhisattva named Sumedha (Rutong), I had already entered Nirvana at Dipamkara Buddha's (Randeng Fo) place.' When Sumedha Bodhisattva was at the Seventh Dwelling (seventh Bodhisattva stage), he obtained the forbearance of non-origination (Anutpattika-dharma-kshanti) and continued to practice for three more stages. The cause of origination is as described in the Sutra of Fundamental Conduct (Ben Xing Jing). The detailed meaning is that Sumedha, at the Seventh Dwelling, relied on the forbearance of non-origination to witness the truth of no birth and no death, so it is said that he entered Nirvana. What is being refuted here is that if one has already attained Nirvana, it means ultimate perfection and no further practice is needed, then how could one continue to practice the next three stages? The ancient translation of the Ten Grounds (Dashabhumi) is also called the Ten Dwellings. If Nirvana is unique, there should be no difference between the Three Vehicles. If there are really differences between the Three Vehicles, then it is not ultimately perfect. If the ultimate Dao has high and low distinctions, then how should we choose among the different sayings of the many scriptures? The first four sentences question the differences between the Three Vehicles, because the 'oneness' and 'difference' of the Three Vehicles contradict each other, so it is not ultimate. That means impermanence. The next two sentences follow the previous point of view.
以難三位之殊。升降高下也。中謂折中亦正也。
辨差第九 十演之五也。辨謂分辨。
無名曰。然究竟之道理無差也 理無二。實所以究竟。
法華經云。第一大道無有兩正。吾以方便為怠慢者。於一乘道分別說三。三車出火宅。即其事也 亦義引法華前後之文正法華善權品云。是一乘道寂然之地無有二上等。妙法化城品云。佛為求道者中路懈廢。意止息故以方便力。於一乘道分別說三。懈廢亦怠慢也。火宅可知。
以俱出生死故。同稱無為。所乘不一故有三名。統其會歸一而已矣 三乘雲殊免患是同。所乘下通理教行果。今略就教行釋之。教者。謂依一乘分別說三。即諦緣度。行者。三乘三行大小不一。統其下意謂能乘之人隨所乘之法。不一而有三名。所歸之理唯一無二。
而難云。三乘之道皆因無為而有差別。此以人三。三于無為。非無為有三也 初四句敘難。此以下出理。三差在機不在於理。
故放光云。涅槃有差別耶。答曰。無差別。但如來結習都盡。聲聞結習末盡耳 即彼經二十四中之文。但如來下彼云。但如來諸習結盡爾。聲聞習結不悉盡等。即二障種子習氣。此約三乘斷惑淺深。以分三異。非涅槃有三也。
請以近喻以況遠旨。如人斬木去尺無尺去寸無
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 用三種不同的方式來質疑三乘的差別。升降、高下也是差別。'中'指的是折中，也是正的意思。
辨別差別，是十演中的第五個。辨，指的是分辨。
無名氏說：'然而究竟的道理是沒有差別的。' 道理沒有兩樣。'實'是究竟的根本。
《法華經》說：'第一大道沒有兩種正道。我因為方便的緣故，對懈怠的人，在唯一的佛道上分別說了三乘。' 三車出自火宅，就是這件事。 這也引用了《法華經》前後文的意義。《法華經·方便品》說：'這是一乘道寂靜之地，沒有第二種更高的。' 《法華經·化城喻品》說：'佛爲了求道者在中途懈怠而停止，爲了讓他們休息的緣故，用方便的力量，在唯一的佛道上分別說了三乘。' 懈怠也就是怠慢。火宅的情況可以瞭解。
因為都出生於生死輪迴，所以都稱為'無為'。所乘坐的工具不一樣，所以有三種名稱。總而言之，最終歸於一。 三乘的不同在於避免了患難，這一點是相同的。'所乘'下通於理、教、行、果。現在簡略地就教和行來解釋。教，指的是依據一乘分別說三乘，也就是諦、緣、度。行，三乘的三種修行方式大小不一。總而言之，它的意思是說能夠乘坐的人隨著所乘坐的法，不一而有三種名稱，所歸的道理唯一沒有兩樣。
有人質疑說：'三乘之道都因為無為而有差別。' 這是因為人的差別而有三乘，三乘在於無為，而不是無為本身有三種差別。 前四句敘述了質疑。以下闡述道理。三種差別在于根機，而不在於道理。
所以《放光經》說：'涅槃有差別嗎？' 回答說：'沒有差別。只是如來的習氣都斷盡了，而聲聞的習氣還沒有斷盡罷了。' 就是那部經第二十四品中的文字。'只是如來'以下，經中說：'只是如來各種習氣都斷盡了，聲聞的習氣沒有完全斷盡等等。' 指的是二障的種子習氣。這是從三乘斷除迷惑的深淺來區分三種不同，而不是涅槃本身有三種差別。
請用近處的比喻來比況深遠的旨意。比如人砍木頭，去掉一尺就沒有一尺，去掉一寸就沒有一寸。
【English Translation】 English version: To challenge the distinctions of the Three Vehicles in three different ways. Ascending and descending, high and low, are also distinctions. 'Middle' refers to compromise, which is also correctness.
Discriminating differences is the fifth of the Ten Evolutions. 'Discriminating' means to distinguish.
The Nameless One said: 'However, the ultimate principle has no difference.' The principle is not twofold. 'Reality' is the basis for ultimate attainment.
The Lotus Sutra says: 'The foremost great path has no two correct paths. Because of expediency, I have spoken of the Three Vehicles within the One Vehicle for those who are lazy.' The three carts emerging from the burning house are precisely this matter. This also cites the meaning of the preceding and following texts of the Lotus Sutra. The Expedient Means chapter of the Lotus Sutra says: 'This is the One Vehicle path, a place of stillness, without a second superior.' The Parable of the Phantom City chapter of the Lotus Sutra says: 'The Buddha, for the sake of those seeking the path who become weary and stop midway, uses expedient power to speak of the Three Vehicles within the One Vehicle.' Weariness is also laziness. The burning house situation can be understood.
Because they are all born from the cycle of birth and death, they are all called 'unconditioned' (wuwei). Because the vehicles they ride are not the same, they have three names. In summary, they ultimately return to one. The difference in the Three Vehicles lies in avoiding suffering, which is the same. 'What is ridden' connects to principle, teaching, practice, and result. Now, let's briefly explain it in terms of teaching and practice. Teaching refers to explaining the Three Vehicles based on the One Vehicle, which is truth, conditions, and deliverance. Practice refers to the three practices of the Three Vehicles, which vary in size. In summary, it means that those who can ride follow the Dharma they ride, and although they are not the same, they have three names. The principle to which they return is unique and not twofold.
Someone questions: 'The paths of the Three Vehicles all have differences because of the unconditioned.' This is because of the differences in people that there are Three Vehicles; the Three Vehicles are in the unconditioned, not that the unconditioned itself has three differences. The first four sentences describe the challenge. The following explains the principle. The three differences lie in the capacity of the individual, not in the principle itself.
Therefore, the Perfection of Light Sutra says: 'Is there a difference in Nirvana?' The answer is: 'There is no difference. It is just that the Tathagata's habitual tendencies are completely exhausted, while the Shravaka's habitual tendencies are not yet exhausted.' This is the text from the twenty-fourth chapter of that sutra. 'It is just that the Tathagata' and below, the sutra says: 'It is just that the Tathagata's various habitual tendencies are exhausted, while the Shravaka's habitual tendencies are not completely exhausted, etc.' This refers to the seeds of the two obscurations and habitual tendencies. This distinguishes the three differences based on the depth of the Three Vehicles' elimination of delusion, not that Nirvana itself has three differences.
Please use a nearby analogy to compare to the profound meaning. For example, if a person cuts wood, if a foot is removed, there is no foot; if an inch is removed, there is no inch.
寸。修短在於尺寸。不在於無也 已見邊為近。未見邊為遠。人喻三乘。斬喻智斷。木喻種現無喻無為。尺寸喻三乘斷惑多少也。以喻量法昭然可見。
夫群生萬端識根不一。智鑒有淺深。德行有厚薄 初句總指次句。識謂識心。即樂欲不同。謂樂大樂小。根謂根性。即種性不一。即大機小機。次句大乘雙照二空名深。小乘獨見人空名淺。德行下自利之行名薄。二行雙行名厚。亦可諦緣之行名薄。六度萬行名厚。
所以俱之(往)彼岸。而升降不同。彼岸豈異。異自我耳 由識根差別故。所以俱往彼岸而高下不齊。喻以生死為此岸。煩惱為中流。涅槃為彼岸。彼岸唯一為力。不同故成異也。
然則眾經殊辨其致不乖(差) 由前云眾經異說何以取中。今引法華。明三乘一起。三雖差別。至道唯一。三位例然。
責異第十 九折之五也。所證之理既一。如何能證之人三殊耶。此亦躡前而問。下文自具。
有名曰。俱出火宅則無患一也。同出生死則無為一也。而云彼岸無異異自我耳。彼岸則無為岸也。我則體(證)無為者也 初喻次法免患既同。無為定一。而云下舉前違文。彼岸下約法約人。先定其理而後難云。
請問我與無為為一為異。若我即無為。無為亦即我。不得言無為。無
異異自我也。若我異無為。我則非無為。無為自無為。我自常有為。冥會之致又滯而不通 初二句雙審。若我下出第一過。明人法相。即既人法相即人三法三。何云法一也。又若我下出第二過。明人法兩異。無為有為兩分。有為三乘應(不)冥會於無為之理。何言三乘冥會耶。
然則我與無為。一亦無三異亦無三。三乘之名何由而生 以人從法法。一人一也。異則不證於何有三耶。
會異第十一 十演之六也。會謂會通。下文自顯。
無名曰。夫止此而此適彼而彼。所以同於得者得亦得之。同於失者失亦失之 此目此岸。彼目彼岸。猶言居生死之岸。則同生死之患。無為例之。所以下承前已明。文擬老氏。同於得下釋前適彼而彼。得謂證得然通能所。能得之人同所得之理時。理亦同于能得之人。如下云。我即無為無為即我。同於失下釋前。止此而此。能所不相得也。反前可知。
我適無為我即無為。無為雖一何乖不一耶 人證法時人法必即也。所以亦三者。理雖一味。證有淺深故。於法略示。下喻及閤中具顯。
譬猶三鳥出網同適無患之域。無患雖同而鳥鳥各異。不可以鳥鳥各異。謂無患亦異。又不可以無患既一而一于眾鳥。然則鳥即無患。無患即鳥。無患豈異異自鳥耳 初四句舉喻
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『異異自我也』（認為「異」的「異」就是「我」）。如果『我』與『無為』（Nirvana，涅槃，指不生不滅的境界）相異，那麼『我』就不是『無為』。『無為』自然是『無為』，而『我』自然是常『有為』（指有生有滅的世間法）。如果執著于這種冥合的觀點，就會導致滯礙而不通達。以上前兩句需要仔細審察。如果『我』與『無為』相異，就犯了第一個過失，即執著於人法之相。既然認為人法相即，那麼人、法、相即是三，又怎麼能說是法一呢？如果『我』與『無為』相異，就犯了第二個過失，即認為人法是兩種不同的存在，『無為』和『有為』是兩種不同的狀態。如果這樣，有為的三乘（指聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘）就不能冥合於無為的道理，又怎麼能說三乘可以冥合呢？ 既然如此，『我』與『無為』，說一沒有三個『一』，說異也沒有三個『異』。那麼三乘（指聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘）的名號又是從何而來的呢？因為人從法而證得，法與人合一。如果認為是『異』，又如何能證得，又何來三乘之說呢？ 第十一 會異。這是十演的第六部分。『會』指的是會通，下文自然會顯明。 無名（Vimalakirti，維摩詰）說：『如果止於此岸，那麼此岸就適合於此岸；如果適於彼岸，那麼彼岸就適合於彼岸。』所以，與證得的人相同，證得的人也證得了；與失去的人相同，失去的人也失去了。這裡『此』指的是此岸，『彼』指的是彼岸。就像說，居住在生死之岸，就與生死的憂患相同。『無為』可以作為例子。『所以』以下承接前面已經闡明的道理。這段文字模仿老子的風格。『同於得』以下解釋前面所說的『適於彼岸』。『得』指的是證得，然而貫通了能所。能證得的人與所證得的理相同的時候，理也與能證得的人相同。如下文所說：『我即無為，無為即我』。『同於失』以下解釋前面所說的『止於此岸』。能與所不能相互證得。反過來思考就可以明白。 『我』如果適合於『無為』，『我』就是『無為』。『無為』雖然只有一個，為什麼會有不合一的情況呢？當人證得法的時候，人和法必然是相即的。之所以說也有三種情況，是因為理雖然只有一個，但證悟有深淺的差別。因此，對於法略作開示，在下面的比喻和合論中會具體闡明。 譬如三隻鳥從網中飛出，一同飛向沒有憂患的境界。沒有憂患的境界雖然相同，但鳥與鳥之間各有不同。不能因為鳥與鳥之間各有不同，就認為沒有憂患的境界也各不相同。也不能因為沒有憂患的境界是同一個，就認為它與所有的鳥都是同一個。既然如此，鳥就是沒有憂患的境界，沒有憂患的境界就是鳥。沒有憂患的境界難道是與鳥自身相異嗎？以上前四句是舉例說明。
【English Translation】 English version 『Different differences are also myself.』 If 『I』 am different from 『Nirvana』 (Wuwei, non-action, referring to the state of non-birth and non-death), then 『I』 am not 『Nirvana.』 『Nirvana』 is naturally 『Nirvana,』 while 『I』 am naturally always 『active』 (referring to the worldly dharmas of birth and death). If one clings to this view of obscure union, it will lead to stagnation and lack of understanding. The first two sentences above need to be carefully examined. If 『I』 am different from 『Nirvana,』 then one commits the first error, which is clinging to the characteristics of person and dharma. Since it is believed that person and dharma are identical, then person, dharma, and characteristic are three, so how can it be said that dharma is one? If 『I』 am different from 『Nirvana,』 then one commits the second error, which is thinking that person and dharma are two different existences, and that 『Nirvana』 and 『action』 are two different states. If this is the case, the active Three Vehicles (Shravaka Vehicle, Pratyekabuddha Vehicle, Bodhisattva Vehicle) cannot obscurely unite with the principle of Nirvana, so how can it be said that the Three Vehicles can unite? Since this is the case, regarding 『I』 and 『Nirvana,』 saying one does not have three 『ones,』 and saying different does not have three 『differences.』 Then from where do the names of the Three Vehicles (Shravaka Vehicle, Pratyekabuddha Vehicle, Bodhisattva Vehicle) come from? Because people attain enlightenment from the Dharma, and the Dharma and people are one. If it is considered 『different,』 then how can one attain enlightenment, and how can there be talk of the Three Vehicles? Eleventh: Meeting Differences. This is the sixth part of the Ten Evolutions. 『Meeting』 refers to comprehensive understanding, which will naturally become clear in the following text. Vimalakirti (Wuming) said: 『If one stops at this shore, then this shore is suitable for this shore; if one is suitable for the other shore, then the other shore is suitable for the other shore.』 Therefore, being the same as those who attain, those who attain also attain; being the same as those who lose, those who lose also lose. Here, 『this』 refers to this shore, and 『that』 refers to the other shore. It is like saying that living on the shore of birth and death is the same as the worries of birth and death. 『Nirvana』 can be taken as an example. 『Therefore』 below continues the previously clarified principle. This passage imitates the style of Lao Tzu. 『Same as attaining』 below explains what was said earlier, 『suitable for the other shore.』 『Attaining』 refers to enlightenment, yet it penetrates the subject and object. When the person who can attain enlightenment is the same as the principle that is attained, the principle is also the same as the person who can attain enlightenment. As the following text says: 『I am Nirvana, Nirvana is I.』 『Same as losing』 below explains what was said earlier, 『stopping at this shore.』 The subject and object cannot mutually attain enlightenment. Thinking about it in reverse will make it clear. If 『I』 am suitable for 『Nirvana,』 then 『I』 am 『Nirvana.』 Although 『Nirvana』 is only one, why would there be a situation of non-unity? When a person attains the Dharma, the person and the Dharma are necessarily identical. The reason why there are also three situations is because although the principle is only one, there are differences in the depth of enlightenment. Therefore, a brief explanation of the Dharma is given, which will be specifically clarified in the following metaphor and synthesis. For example, three birds fly out of a net and fly together towards a realm without worries. Although the realm without worries is the same, the birds are different from each other. One cannot think that because the birds are different from each other, the realm without worries is also different. Nor can one think that because the realm without worries is the same, it is the same as all the birds. Since this is the case, the bird is the realm without worries, and the realm without worries is the bird. Is the realm without worries different from the bird itself? The first four sentences above are an illustration.
體。三鳥隨舉大中小者。在網為患。出網之時遠近雖殊。皆為無患之域。以喻三乘斷惑出界。不可下鳥患相望反責一異。然則下釋成相即。又不防鳥異。美哉斯喻何疑不遣。
如是三乘眾生俱越妄想之樊。同適無為之境無為雖同而乘乘各異。不可以乘乘各異。謂無為亦異。又不可以無為既一而一於三乘也。然則我即無為無為即我無為。豈異異自我耳 三乘名眾生者。諸蘊未轉二死猶存。相續之心猶生。和合之識未破。等覺已降皆有此名。亦前四句明人證法。不可下四句以人會理。會許淺深。人可云異。理何異耶。亦不可云由理一故。不許證有淺深之殊。何云一亦無三耶。然則下結成相即。理則元一證則有三也。句句合前不煩重指。
所以無患雖同。而升虛有遠近。無為雖一而幽(妙)鑒有淺深 承前法喻。以答異亦無三也。初二句喻明。后二句法說。前舉三鳥雖異免患是同。免則相即。不妨人異。以明一亦有三。此舉逃患雖同遠近有異。以明異亦有三。但異在遠近不在於法。幽鑒三乘之智也。
無為即乘也。乘即無為也。此非我異無為。以未盡無為故有三耳 初二句明相即無異。此非下以相即故非異。非異故冥會。誰云其異而乖于冥會耶。以未盡故有三。誰云異亦無三。血脈隱微。可細推繹。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 體。如果三隻鳥有大中小之分，在網中時都是禍患。脫離網的時候，遠近雖然不同，但都到達了沒有禍患的區域。這比喻三乘（Sravakayana，聲聞乘；Pratyekabuddhayana，緣覺乘；Bodhisattvayana，菩薩乘）斷除迷惑，脫離輪迴。不能用下等鳥的禍患去相互責備，說它們是一樣還是不一樣。既然如此，下面的解釋就成立了，即現象是相同的。而且也不妨礙鳥的差異。這個比喻真好，還有什麼疑惑不能消除呢？
像這樣，三乘的眾生都超越了妄想的束縛，一同到達了無為（Nirvana，涅槃）的境界。無為雖然相同，但乘與乘之間各有不同。不能因為乘與乘之間各有不同，就說無為也是不同的。也不能因為無為既然是一樣的，就說它對於三乘來說也是一樣的。既然如此，我就是無為，無為就是我，無為難道與我不同嗎？三乘被稱為眾生，是因為諸蘊（Skandha，五蘊）還沒有轉化，二死（分段生死和變易生死）仍然存在，相續的心仍然在生滅，和合的識還沒有破除。即使是等覺菩薩，也都有這個名稱。前面的四句是說明人證悟了法，不能用後面的四句用人去理解道理，理解允許有深淺。人可以說有不同，道理有什麼不同呢？也不能說因為道理是一樣的，就不允許證悟有深淺的差別。又怎麼能說一也沒有三呢？既然如此，下面的結論是現象是相同的。道理原本是一樣的，但證悟卻有三種不同。句句都與前面相合，不用再重複指出了。
所以，沒有禍患雖然相同，但上升到虛空有遠近之別。無為雖然是一樣的，但幽深的體悟有深淺之分。承接前面的比喻和法理，來回答異也沒有三的問題。前面的兩句是比喻說明，後面的兩句是法理說明。前面舉了三隻鳥雖然不同，但免除禍患是相同的。免除禍患就是相同，不妨礙人的不同，用來說明一也有三。這裡舉了逃離禍患雖然相同，但遠近有不同，用來說明異也有三。但不同在於遠近，不在於法。幽深的體悟是三乘的智慧。
無為就是乘，乘就是無為。這不是說我與無為不同，因為沒有完全達到無為，所以才有三種不同。前面的兩句說明現象相同，沒有不同。下面的解釋是因為現象相同所以沒有不同。因為沒有不同所以才能冥合。誰說它們不同而違背了冥合呢？因為沒有完全達到所以才有三種不同。誰說不同也沒有三呢？血脈隱微，可以仔細推敲。
【English Translation】 English version: Substance. If the three birds are of different sizes, large, medium, and small, they are all a source of trouble when caught in the net. When they escape the net, although the distances they travel may vary, they all reach a realm free from trouble. This is a metaphor for the Three Vehicles (Sravakayana, Pratyekabuddhayana, Bodhisattvayana) severing delusions and escaping the cycle of rebirth. One cannot use the troubles of the lower birds to blame each other, questioning whether they are the same or different. Therefore, the following explanation holds true: phenomena are identical. Moreover, the differences between the birds are not hindered. This metaphor is excellent; what doubts remain that cannot be dispelled?
Thus, beings of the Three Vehicles all transcend the bonds of delusion and together reach the realm of non-action (Nirvana). Although non-action is the same, each Vehicle is different. One cannot say that because each Vehicle is different, non-action is also different. Nor can one say that because non-action is the same, it is the same for the Three Vehicles. Therefore, I am non-action, and non-action is me. How can non-action be different from me? The Three Vehicles are called beings because the aggregates (Skandha) have not yet been transformed, the two deaths (death by segments and death by transformation) still exist, the continuous mind is still arising and ceasing, and the combined consciousness has not been broken. Even Bodhisattvas who have reached the stage of near-perfect enlightenment still have this name. The first four sentences explain that people realize the Dharma. One cannot use the last four sentences to understand the principle through people. Understanding allows for varying depths. People can be said to be different, but how can the principle be different? Nor can one say that because the principle is the same, there is no allowance for differences in the depth of realization. How can one say that one also has no three? Therefore, the following conclusion is that phenomena are identical. The principle is originally one, but realization has three different aspects. Every sentence corresponds to the previous ones, so there is no need to point them out again.
Therefore, although being free from trouble is the same, ascending into the void has different distances. Although non-action is the same, profound understanding has different depths. This continues the previous metaphor and principle to answer the question of whether difference also has no three. The first two sentences are a metaphorical explanation, and the last two sentences are a Dharma explanation. The previous example of the three birds, although different, having the same escape from trouble. Escaping trouble is the same, not hindering the differences between people, to illustrate that one also has three. Here, the example of escaping trouble being the same, but with different distances, is used to illustrate that difference also has three. But the difference lies in the distance, not in the Dharma. Profound understanding is the wisdom of the Three Vehicles.
Non-action is the Vehicle, and the Vehicle is non-action. This does not mean that I am different from non-action, because there are three differences due to not fully attaining non-action. The first two sentences explain that phenomena are identical, with no difference. The following explanation is that because phenomena are identical, there is no difference. Because there is no difference, there is a merging. Who says they are different and violate the merging? Because it is not fully attained, there are three differences. Who says that difference also has no three? The subtle details are hidden and can be carefully examined.
詰漸第十二 九折之六也。詰難也。由前未盡有三。以是漸義故今詰之。
有名曰。萬累滋彰本于妄想。妄想既祛則萬累都息。二乘得盡智菩薩得無生智。是時妄想都盡。結縛永除 枝末粗惑眾多名萬滋益也。彰著也。妄想即根本無明細惑。意云。枝末雖眾本惑唯一。但剪本惑末惑頓息。理可頓證。盡智下大品說。三乘之人共十一智。第九名盡智。謂苦已盡見等。第十名無生智。謂苦已見而不更見等。則前之十智聲聞皆有。盡智在已辦地得之。今云。菩薩得無生智者。二地已上第九菩薩地阿鞞跋致。如實知諸法本自不生今亦無滅。名無生智。不共二乘也。意謂智起惑亡理即顯現。如大品放光及智論二十三廣說。
結縛既除則心無為。心既無為理無餘翳 初一句躡前。次句明證。后二句惑盡。理如明鏡惑如塵翳。妄惑既盡理即明凈。
經曰。是諸聖智不相違背。不出不在其實俱空。又曰。無為大道平等無二 放光第二略云。聲聞辟支佛菩薩佛世尊。是諸聖智不相違背。乃至云。不出不在其實空者無有差殊。與大品大同。今謂在字宜是生字。傳之誤也。智論四十三解云。因邊不起名為不出。緣邊不起。名為不生。又曰下亦義引大品等。如三慧品。須菩提白佛言。世尊無為法中可得差別不。佛言。不
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 《詰漸第十二》是《九折》的第六部分，意為詰難。由於前面還有三個問題沒有完全闡述清楚，爲了完善漸修的意義，所以現在進行詰難。
有人提出：『種種煩惱的增多和顯現，根本在於虛妄的念想。如果虛妄的念想被去除，那麼所有的煩惱都會止息。二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）能夠證得盡智（一切煩惱已盡的智慧），菩薩能夠證得無生智（證悟諸法不生不滅的智慧）。』當虛妄的念想完全止息時，所有的結縛都會永遠消除。
『枝末』指的是眾多粗淺的迷惑，所以說『萬累滋彰』，意思是顯現出來。『妄想』指的是根本無明這種細微的迷惑。這裡的意思是說，枝末的迷惑雖然眾多，但根本的迷惑只有一個。只要剪除根本的迷惑，枝末的迷惑就會立刻止息，真理就可以立刻證得。關於盡智，在《大品般若經》中有說明。三乘（聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘）之人共有十一種智慧，第九種叫做盡智，指的是苦已經滅盡等。第十種叫做無生智，指的是苦已經見到而不再見到等。那麼，前面的十種智慧聲聞乘都有。盡智是在已經修辦完成的階段證得的。現在說菩薩證得無生智，指的是二地以上的第九地菩薩，即阿鞞跋致（不退轉菩薩），如實地了知諸法本來不生，現在也沒有滅，這叫做無生智，是不與二乘共有的。意思是說，智慧生起，迷惑消亡，真理就會顯現出來，如同《大品般若經》的放光品以及《智度論》第二十三卷所廣泛闡述的那樣。
結縛既然已經消除，那麼心就達到無為的境界。心既然達到無為的境界，真理就沒有剩餘的遮蔽。
第一句承接前文，第二句說明證悟，后兩句說明迷惑滅盡。真理如同明鏡，迷惑如同塵埃遮蔽。虛妄的迷惑既然滅盡，真理就明凈顯現。
經書上說：『這些聖人的智慧不互相違背，不生不滅，實際上都是空性。』又說：『無為的大道平等沒有差別。』
《放光般若經》第二品簡略地說：『聲聞、辟支佛（緣覺）、菩薩、佛世尊，這些聖人的智慧不互相違背。』乃至說：『不生不滅，實際上是空性，沒有差別。』與《大品般若經》大體相同。我認為這裡的『在』字應該是『生』字，是傳抄的錯誤。智度論第四十三卷解釋說：『因緣邊不起叫做不出，緣邊不起叫做不生。』又說，下面也是引用《大品般若經》等的意思，如同《三慧品》。須菩提問佛說：『世尊，在無為法中可以得到差別嗎？』佛說：『不能。』
English version: Chapter 12: Refuting Gradualism is the sixth part of Nine Refractions. 'Refuting' means to challenge or question. There are three issues from the previous section that were not fully explained. To complete the meaning of gradual cultivation, they are now being challenged.
Someone proposes: 'The increase and manifestation of all afflictions are rooted in deluded thoughts. If deluded thoughts are removed, then all afflictions will cease. The Two Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna) can attain Exhaustion Wisdom (Jñāta, the wisdom of having exhausted all afflictions), and Bodhisattvas can attain Non-arising Wisdom (Anutpāda-jñāna, the wisdom of realizing that all dharmas are neither created nor destroyed).' When deluded thoughts are completely extinguished, all bonds will be permanently eliminated.
'Branches and twigs' refer to the numerous coarse delusions, hence the saying 'manifold accumulations are manifested,' meaning they are revealed. 'Deluded thoughts' refer to the subtle delusion of fundamental ignorance (Avidyā). The meaning here is that although the branch delusions are numerous, the fundamental delusion is only one. As long as the fundamental delusion is cut off, the branch delusions will immediately cease, and the truth can be immediately realized. Regarding Exhaustion Wisdom, it is explained in the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra. The people of the Three Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna, and Bodhisattvayāna) share eleven wisdoms. The ninth is called Exhaustion Wisdom, which refers to the exhaustion of suffering, etc. The tenth is called Non-arising Wisdom, which refers to having seen suffering and no longer seeing it, etc. So, the first ten wisdoms are possessed by Śrāvakas. Exhaustion Wisdom is attained in the stage of having completed the task. Now, it is said that Bodhisattvas attain Non-arising Wisdom, which refers to the ninth-ground Bodhisattva above the Second Ground, i.e., Avaivartika (non-retrogressing Bodhisattva), who truly knows that all dharmas are originally unarisen and have no cessation now. This is called Non-arising Wisdom, which is not shared with the Two Vehicles. The meaning is that when wisdom arises and delusion vanishes, the truth will manifest, as extensively explained in the Light Emission Chapter of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra and the twenty-third volume of the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa.
Since the bonds have been eliminated, the mind reaches the state of non-action (Asaṃskṛta). Since the mind has reached the state of non-action, there is no remaining obscuration of the truth.
The first sentence connects to the previous text, the second sentence explains enlightenment, and the last two sentences explain the extinction of delusion. Truth is like a clear mirror, and delusion is like dust obscuring it. Since deluded thoughts have been extinguished, the truth is clear and manifest.
The scripture says: 'These wisdoms of the sages do not contradict each other, neither arising nor ceasing, and are actually all emptiness.' It also says: 'The unconditioned great path is equal and without difference.'
The second chapter of the Light Emission Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra briefly says: 'Śrāvakas, Pratyekabuddhas, Bodhisattvas, and Buddhas, these wisdoms of the sages do not contradict each other.' And it says: 'Neither arising nor ceasing, actually emptiness, without difference.' It is largely the same as the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra. I think the word 'zai' (在, in) here should be 'sheng' (生, arising), a mistake in transmission. The forty-third volume of the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa explains: 'Not arising from the side of causes is called non-arising, not arising from the side of conditions is called non-arising.' It also says that the following also quotes the meaning of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra, like the Chapter on the Three Wisdoms. Subhūti asked the Buddha: 'World Honored One, can differences be found in the unconditioned dharma?' The Buddha said: 'No.'
【English Translation】 Modern Chinese Translation: 《Chapter 12: Refuting Gradualism》 is the sixth part of 《Nine Refractions》, meaning to challenge or question. Because there are three questions from the previous section that have not been fully explained, in order to perfect the meaning of gradual cultivation, we now challenge them.
Someone proposes: 'The increase and manifestation of all afflictions are rooted in deluded thoughts. If deluded thoughts are removed, then all afflictions will cease. The Two Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna) can attain Exhaustion Wisdom (Jñāta, the wisdom of having exhausted all afflictions), and Bodhisattvas can attain Non-arising Wisdom (Anutpāda-jñāna, the wisdom of realizing that all dharmas are neither created nor destroyed).' When deluded thoughts are completely extinguished, all bonds will be permanently eliminated.
'Branches and twigs' refer to the numerous coarse delusions, hence the saying 'manifold accumulations are manifested,' meaning they are revealed. 'Deluded thoughts' refer to the subtle delusion of fundamental ignorance (Avidyā). The meaning here is that although the branch delusions are numerous, the fundamental delusion is only one. As long as the fundamental delusion is cut off, the branch delusions will immediately cease, and the truth can be immediately realized. Regarding Exhaustion Wisdom, it is explained in the 《Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra》. The people of the Three Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna, and Bodhisattvayāna) share eleven wisdoms. The ninth is called Exhaustion Wisdom, which refers to the exhaustion of suffering, etc. The tenth is called Non-arising Wisdom, which refers to having seen suffering and no longer seeing it, etc. So, the first ten wisdoms are possessed by Śrāvakas. Exhaustion Wisdom is attained in the stage of having completed the task. Now, it is said that Bodhisattvas attain Non-arising Wisdom, which refers to the ninth-ground Bodhisattva above the Second Ground, i.e., Avaivartika (non-retrogressing Bodhisattva), who truly knows that all dharmas are originally unarisen and have no cessation now. This is called Non-arising Wisdom, which is not shared with the Two Vehicles. The meaning is that when wisdom arises and delusion vanishes, the truth will manifest, as extensively explained in the 《Light Emission Chapter》 of the 《Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra》 and the twenty-third volume of the 《Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa》.
Since the bonds have been eliminated, the mind reaches the state of non-action (Asaṃskṛta). Since the mind has reached the state of non-action, there is no remaining obscuration of the truth.
The first sentence connects to the previous text, the second sentence explains enlightenment, and the last two sentences explain the extinction of delusion. Truth is like a clear mirror, and delusion is like dust obscuring it. Since deluded thoughts have been extinguished, the truth is clear and manifest.
The scripture says: 'These wisdoms of the sages do not contradict each other, neither arising nor ceasing, and are actually all emptiness.' It also says: 'The unconditioned great path is equal and without difference.'
The second chapter of the 《Light Emission Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra》 briefly says: 'Śrāvakas, Pratyekabuddhas, Bodhisattvas, and Buddhas, these wisdoms of the sages do not contradict each other.' And it says: 'Neither arising nor ceasing, actually emptiness, without difference.' It is largely the same as the 《Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra》. I think the word 'zai' (在, in) here should be 'sheng' (生, arising), a mistake in transmission. The forty-third volume of the 《Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa》 explains: 'Not arising from the side of causes is called non-arising, not arising from the side of conditions is called non-arising.' It also says that the following also quotes the meaning of the 《Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra》, like the 《Chapter on the Three Wisdoms》. Subhūti asked the Buddha: 'World Honored One, can differences be found in the unconditioned dharma?' The Buddha said: 'No.'
也等。
既曰無二。則不容心異。不體(證)則已。體應窮微而曰體而未盡。是所未悟也 初句躡前理智無二。次句會前不相違背。不體下意云。三乘之智無殊。是唯不證證則頓盡。如何分小大之殊。談漸盡之理。
明漸第十三 十演之七也。謂結習不可頓盡。無為不可頓見。譬如磨鏡塵亦漸除。明亦漸現。
無名曰。無為無二則已然矣。結使重惑而謂可頓盡。亦所未喻(曉)也 初二句許前。結使下正明其漸。此明方便凈也。三乘之人皆以見前伏惑。登見道已始盡分別。思惟位中漸斷俱生。如是已歷干慧乃至已辦及辟支佛菩薩等地。方得無漏盡無生智。
經曰。三箭中的。三獸渡河。中渡無異而有淺深之殊者。為力不同故也 初二喻皆古譯毗婆沙論之義。故彼論二十二云。猶如一的若木若鐵。眾箭所中如是一。無為體為三想所行等。五十五云。于甚深十二因緣河。能盡其底。是名為佛。二乘不爾。如三獸渡河。謂兔馬象。兔則騰擲乃渡。馬或盡底或不盡底。香象於一切時。無不盡底等。
如是三乘眾生俱濟緣起之津。同鑒四諦之的。絕偽即真同升無為。然其所乘不一者。亦以智力不同故也 緣起謂十二因緣。津謂渡處。渡已名濟。四諦可知。若緣若諦。隨一法門三人同稟。通教意也
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 也等。
既然說『無二』（沒有差別），那麼就不應該有心意的差異。不體證（證悟）就算了，如果體證應該窮盡細微之處，卻說體證了但沒有完全窮盡，這就是還沒有領悟的地方。第一句承接前面所說的理智沒有差別。第二句會合前面所說的不相違背。『不體下』的意思是說，三乘（聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘）的智慧沒有差別，只是沒有證悟罷了，一旦證悟就頓然窮盡，怎麼會有大小的差別，談論漸次窮盡的道理呢？
明漸第十三，是十演的第七部分。說明結習（煩惱習氣）不可能頓然斷盡，無為（涅槃）不可能頓然證見，譬如磨鏡子，塵垢也是逐漸去除，光明也是逐漸顯現。
無名說：『無為沒有差別，這已經明白了。』但說結使（煩惱的根本）是沉重的迷惑，卻說可以頓然斷盡，這也是沒有理解的。前面兩句是贊同對方的觀點。『結使下』正式說明是漸修。這是說明方便的清凈。三乘的人都以見道來伏惑，登上見道位后才開始斷盡分別，在思惟位中逐漸斷除俱生的煩惱。像這樣經歷了干慧地乃至已辦地以及辟支佛、菩薩等地，才能得到無漏的盡無生智（斷盡煩惱，不再受生的智慧）。
經上說：『三箭中的』，『三獸渡河』。射中目標和渡河沒有不同，但有深淺的差別，是因為力量不同的緣故。前兩個比喻都是古譯《毗婆沙論》的含義。所以那部論的第二十二卷說：『譬如一個靶子，無論是木頭還是鐵，眾箭射中都是一樣的。』無為的本體被三種想所行等等。第五十五卷說：『在甚深的十二因緣河中，能夠窮盡其底，這叫做佛。』二乘不是這樣。就像三獸渡河，指兔子、馬、象。兔子只是跳躍著渡河，馬或者能觸到底或者不能觸到底，而香像在任何時候，都能完全觸到底等等。
像這樣，三乘眾生共同渡過緣起（十二因緣）的河流，共同照見四諦（苦、集、滅、道）的目標，斷絕虛偽而證得真如，共同升向無為（涅槃）。然而他們所乘坐的工具不一樣，也是因為智力不同的緣故。緣起指的是十二因緣。津指的是渡口，渡過之後叫做濟。四諦是可以理解的。無論是緣起還是四諦，隨順一個法門，三人都共同稟受，這是通教的含義。
【English Translation】 English version Also, etc.
Since it is said that there is 'no duality,' then there should be no difference in intention. If one does not embody (realize), then so be it. If embodiment should exhaust the subtle and yet it is said that one has embodied but not fully exhausted, then that is what has not been understood. The first sentence follows the previous statement that reason and wisdom are not different. The second sentence combines the previous statement that they are not contradictory. The meaning of 'If one does not embody' is that the wisdom of the Three Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna, Bodhisattvayāna) is not different, it is only that one has not realized it. Once realized, it is exhausted immediately. How can there be differences of small and large, and talk of the principle of gradual exhaustion?
Manifesting Gradualness, Thirteenth, is the seventh part of the Ten Evolutions. It states that accumulated habits (klesha-vasana) cannot be exhausted immediately, and the Unconditioned (Nirvana) cannot be seen immediately. It is like polishing a mirror, the dust is gradually removed, and the light is gradually revealed.
Anonymity says: 'The Unconditioned has no duality, this is already understood.' But to say that the bonds (fundamental afflictions) are heavy delusions, and yet say that they can be exhausted immediately, this is also not understood. The first two sentences agree with the other party's point of view. 'Bonds below' formally states that it is gradual cultivation. This explains the purity of expedient means. People of the Three Vehicles all use the Path of Seeing to subdue afflictions. After ascending to the Path of Seeing, they begin to exhaust discriminations. In the stage of contemplation, they gradually cut off innate afflictions. In this way, after experiencing the Dry Wisdom Ground up to the Stage of the Arhat, as well as the Pratyekabuddha and Bodhisattva stages, one can obtain the unconditioned Exhaustion of Afflictions and Non-Arising Wisdom (wisdom of exhausting afflictions and no longer being reborn).
The Sutra says: 'Three arrows hit the mark,' 'Three animals cross the river.' There is no difference in hitting the target and crossing the river, but there are differences in depth, because the strength is different. The first two metaphors are the meaning of the ancient translation of the Vibhasa. Therefore, that treatise, volume twenty-two, says: 'For example, a target, whether wood or iron, is the same when hit by many arrows.' The essence of the Unconditioned is practiced by the three types of thought, etc. Volume fifty-five says: 'In the very deep river of the Twelve Links of Dependent Origination, one who can exhaust its bottom is called a Buddha.' The Two Vehicles are not like this. It is like three animals crossing the river, referring to the rabbit, horse, and elephant. The rabbit only leaps across the river, the horse may or may not touch the bottom, while the fragrant elephant always touches the bottom completely, etc.
In this way, sentient beings of the Three Vehicles together cross the river of Dependent Origination (Twelve Nidanas), together illuminate the target of the Four Noble Truths (duhkha, samudaya, nirodha, marga), cut off falsehood and realize Suchness, and together ascend to the Unconditioned (Nirvana). However, the vehicles they ride are different, also because their intellectual strength is different. Dependent Origination refers to the Twelve Nidanas. Ford refers to the crossing point, and after crossing it is called salvation. The Four Noble Truths can be understood. Whether it is Dependent Origination or the Four Noble Truths, following one Dharma gate, the three all receive it together, this is the meaning of the Shared Teaching.
。所稟法門無殊。隨其機宜但成自乘菩提。亦婆沙之意。涅槃略云。十二緣生下智觀者得聲聞道等。見諦之理名曰中的。行相皆多。如婆沙說。絕偽者。斷惑也。即真者。證理也。同升無為者。明所趣非異。然其下明能趣有殊。后句即論語云射不主皮為力不同科。以法對喻。昭然可知。
夫群有雖眾。然其量有涯。正(直)使(令)智猶身子辨若滿愿。窮才極慮莫窺其畔 群有即萬物也。量謂邊量緣起事法。雖廣多無際。然有名有相皆屬分限。故云有涯。身子即舍利弗。智慧第一故。滿愿即富樓那。辨才第一故。意云。有限俗諦直令窮滿愿之辨才。不能盡談其名極。身子之智慮不能遍知其狀。故涅槃三十五云。我往一時在耆阇崛山。與彌勒菩薩共論世諦。舍利弗等五百聲聞。於是事中都不識知。何況出世第一義諦。
況夫虛無之數(妙)重玄之域。其道無涯。欲之頓盡耶 虛無重玄擬老書為文。謂涅槃也。有涯之數令智辨之人尚不窺其畔。無涯之真使三乘眾生欲令頓盡。豈能爾耶。譬乎九層之臺不可躐等。萬里青冥頓欲階升。于道未許故。
書不云乎。為學者日益為道者日損。為道者。為于無為者也。為于無為而日日損。此豈頓得之謂。要損之又損之。以至於無損耳 例引老書。論主于中間而釋之
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 所稟受的法門並沒有什麼不同，只是隨著眾生的根器和接受能力，各自成就自己的菩提道。這也是《婆沙論》的本意。《涅槃經》中簡略地說，以低下的智慧觀察十二因緣的人，只能證得聲聞道等等。證見真諦的道理，名為『中的』，其修行的方式和表現多種多樣，正如《婆沙論》所說。『絕偽』，就是斷除迷惑；『即真』，就是證悟真理；『同升無為』，說明所趨向的目標並沒有不同。然而，後面一句說明能趨向的方法卻各有差異。后一句就像《論語》所說的『射箭不穿透皮革，是因為力量不同』，用佛法來比喻，就非常清楚明白了。
世間萬物雖然眾多，但其數量是有限度的。即使智慧如舍利弗（智慧第一），辯才如富樓那（辯才第一），窮盡他們的才能和思慮，也無法窺探到萬物的邊際。『群有』就是指萬物。『量』是指邊際，緣起的事法，雖然廣闊無邊，但有名有相，都屬於有限的範圍，所以說『有涯』。舍利弗因為智慧第一，富樓那因為辯才第一。意思是說，對於有限的世俗諦，即使窮盡富樓那的辯才，也不能完全談論其名稱；用盡舍利弗的智慧思慮，也不能完全知曉其狀態。所以《涅槃經》第三十五卷說，『我過去曾經在耆阇崛山（靈鷲山），與彌勒菩薩共同討論世俗諦，舍利弗等五百聲聞，對於這件事都不認識、不知道，更何況是出世間的第一義諦呢？』
更何況是虛無的境界（妙），重玄的領域，其道是無邊無際的，想要一下子就完全領悟嗎？『虛無重玄』是模仿老子的書來寫的，指的是涅槃。有限的世間萬物，即使是智慧和辯才超群的人尚且不能窺探其邊際，無邊無際的真理，想要讓三乘的眾生一下子就完全領悟，怎麼可能呢？這就像要一下子登上九層的高臺是不可能的，想要一下子就升到萬里高空也是不可能的，在佛道上是不允許這樣做的。
《老子》不是說過嗎？『為學的人，每天都在增加；修道的人，每天都在減少。』修道的人，是爲了達到無為的境界。爲了達到無為的境界而每天減少，這難道是一下子就能得到的嗎？需要減少了又減少，以至於達到無所減少的境界。《老子》原文被引用，論主在中間進行了解釋。
【English Translation】 English version: The Dharma methods received are not different in essence. They simply allow each individual to achieve their own Bodhi according to their capacity and receptiveness. This is also the intention of the Vibhasa (Commentary). The Nirvana Sutra briefly states that those who observe the twelve links of dependent origination with inferior wisdom only attain the path of the Sravakas (Hearers) and so on. The principle of seeing the truth is called 'hitting the mark,' and its practices and manifestations are diverse, as explained in the Vibhasa. 'Cutting off falsehood' means eliminating delusion; 'realizing truth' means attaining enlightenment; 'ascending to Asamskrta (Unconditioned) together' indicates that the goals are not different. However, the following sentence clarifies that the methods of approaching the goal vary. The latter sentence is like the Analects saying, 'Shooting arrows that do not penetrate the leather is due to different strengths.' Using the Dharma as an analogy, it becomes very clear.
Although the multitude of beings is vast, their quantity is finite. Even if wisdom is like Sariputra's (foremost in wisdom) and eloquence is like Purna's (foremost in eloquence), exhausting their talents and thoughts cannot fathom the limits of beings. 'The multitude of beings' refers to all things. 'Quantity' refers to boundaries, the events and phenomena of dependent origination. Although vast and boundless, they have names and forms, all belonging to limited scopes, hence 'finite.' Sariputra is foremost in wisdom, and Purna is foremost in eloquence. The meaning is that, regarding the finite mundane truth, even exhausting Purna's eloquence cannot fully discuss its names; using up Sariputra's wisdom and thoughts cannot fully know its states. Therefore, the thirty-fifth chapter of the Nirvana Sutra says, 'I once was on Grdhrakuta Mountain (Vulture Peak) discussing mundane truth with Maitreya Bodhisattva. Sariputra and five hundred Sravakas did not recognize or know anything about this matter, let alone the supramundane ultimate truth.'
Moreover, what about the realm of emptiness (sunyata) (subtle), the domain of profound mystery? Its path is boundless. Do you want to completely comprehend it all at once? 'Emptiness and profound mystery' imitates the writings of Lao Tzu, referring to Nirvana. Regarding finite mundane things, even those with outstanding wisdom and eloquence cannot fathom their limits. How can the boundless truth be completely comprehended all at once by the beings of the Three Vehicles? It is like trying to climb a nine-story tower in one leap, or trying to ascend to the vast sky in an instant, which is not allowed on the path of the Dharma.
Does the Tao Te Ching not say, 'For learning, one increases daily; for the Tao (the Way), one decreases daily.' Those who cultivate the Tao do so for the sake of Asamskrta (the Unconditioned). Decreasing daily to reach the Asamskrta, is this something that can be attained all at once? One needs to decrease and decrease again, until reaching the state of no decrease. The original text of Lao Tzu is quoted, and the author explains it in the middle.
。以喻漸斷之理。如見前見后之節級。性宗相宗之位次寄位斷惑。皆此理也。
經喻螢日智用。可知矣 放光第二云。舍利弗譬如螢火蟲不作是念言。我光明照閻浮提。普令大明。如是舍利弗諸聲聞辟支佛亦無是念言。我當行六波羅蜜。具足十八法。成阿惟三佛。度脫眾生。舍利弗譬如日出遍照閻浮提。莫不蒙明者。如是菩薩行六波羅蜜。具足十八法。成阿惟三佛。度不可計一切眾生。
譏動第十四 九折之七也。譏諷也。亦詰難之謂。前斷惑證理損益等皆動。故論文雖別引經以辯。然意中含有前旨。如下云。既以取捨為心。損益為體。豈非盡惑證理之動也。所以譏動者。欲明動而常寂。寂而恒動。無住之行。事理雙修。不爾奚證無住涅槃之果。
有名曰。經稱法身已上入無為境。心不可以智知。形不可以像測。體絕陰入心智寂滅。而復云。進修三位積德彌廣 方廣分中共示菩薩入地。心證真如離分別故智不知。以法為身故象弗測。至七地中身心無相。如何復進后之三地。焉非其動乎。
夫進修本(因)於好(去)尚。積德生(起)于涉求。好尚則取捨情見。涉求則損益交陳 初二句推因。謂心有好尚於後位。所以進修其勝分。身有涉求于眾德。所以復出于自分。次二句顯其過患。取后舍前
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：用比喻來說明逐漸斷除的道理，就像看到前面和後面的階梯一樣。性宗（強調自性本具的宗派）和相宗（強調現象差別的宗派）的位次，以及寄位斷惑（寄託于某個位次來斷除迷惑），都是這個道理。
經文用螢火蟲和太陽來比喻智慧的作用，這已經很明顯了。《放光般若經》第二品說：『舍利弗（釋迦牟尼佛的弟子，以智慧著稱），譬如螢火蟲不會這樣想：我的光明要照亮閻浮提（世界），普遍帶來光明。』 舍利弗，像這樣，各位聲聞（聽聞佛法而修行的弟子）和辟支佛（不依師教，自己悟道的修行者）也不會這樣想：我應當修行六波羅蜜（佈施、持戒、忍辱、精進、禪定、智慧），具足十八法（十八不共法，佛獨有的功德），成就阿惟三佛（無上正等正覺，即佛果），度脫眾生。舍利弗，譬如太陽出來，普遍照耀閻浮提，沒有不蒙受光明的。像這樣，菩薩（發願救度眾生的修行者）修行六波羅蜜，具足十八法，成就阿惟三佛，度脫不可計數的眾生。
《譏動品》第十四，是九折（《摩訶般若波羅蜜經》的九種譬喻）中的第七種。譏，是譏諷的意思，也指詰難。前面所說的斷惑證理、損益等，都是動。所以論文雖然另外引用經文來辯論，但意思中包含著前面的旨意。如下文所說：『既然以取捨為心，以損益為體，豈不是儘是惑盡證理的動嗎？』 所以要譏諷動，是爲了說明動而常寂，寂而恒動，是無住的修行，事和理都要雙修。不然怎麼能證得無住涅槃（不生不滅的境界）的果位呢？
有人說：經文稱法身（佛的真身）以上已經進入無為（不造作）的境界，心不可以智來了解，形不可以形象來測度，體已經斷絕了陰入（五陰和十二入），心智寂滅。但又說：『進修三位，積德彌廣。』 《方廣經》中共同顯示菩薩入地（菩薩修行的階位）。心證悟真如（宇宙萬物的本性），遠離分別，所以智不能知。以法為身，所以形象無法測度。到了七地（遠行地）中，身心無相，如何再進修後面的三地呢？這難道不是動嗎？
進修本來是由於愛好和追求，積德產生於涉歷和求取。愛好和追求就會有取捨的情見，涉歷和求取就會有損益的交替。前兩句是推究原因，說的是心有愛好和追求更高的位次，所以要進修更殊勝的部分；身有涉歷和求取眾多的功德，所以要超出自身的本分。后兩句是顯示其中的過患，取後面的捨棄前面的。
【English Translation】 English version: It uses metaphors to illustrate the principle of gradual severance, just like seeing the steps before and after. The positions of the 'Essence School' (emphasizing inherent self-nature) and the 'Phenomenon School' (emphasizing the differences in phenomena), as well as 'relying on a position to sever delusions' (relying on a certain position to sever delusions), are all based on this principle.
The sutra uses fireflies and the sun to illustrate the function of wisdom, which is already clear. The second chapter of the 'Fang Guang Prajna Sutra' says: 'Shariputra (a disciple of Shakyamuni Buddha, known for his wisdom), for example, a firefly would not think: My light will illuminate Jambudvipa (the world), bringing universal brightness.' Shariputra, like this, the 'Shravakas' (disciples who practice by hearing the Buddha's teachings) and 'Pratyekabuddhas' (practitioners who attain enlightenment on their own without a teacher) would not think: I should practice the Six Paramitas (generosity, discipline, patience, diligence, meditation, and wisdom), complete the Eighteen Dharmas (the eighteen unshared qualities, unique merits of the Buddha), achieve 'Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi' (unexcelled complete enlightenment, the state of Buddhahood), and liberate sentient beings. Shariputra, for example, when the sun rises, it shines universally on Jambudvipa, and none are not bathed in its light. Like this, the 'Bodhisattva' (a practitioner who vows to save sentient beings) practices the Six Paramitas, completes the Eighteen Dharmas, achieves Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi, and liberates countless sentient beings.
The fourteenth chapter, 'Criticizing Movement,' is the seventh of the nine metaphors (in the 'Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra'). 'Criticizing' means to satirize, and also refers to questioning. The aforementioned severing of delusions and proving of principles, gains and losses, etc., are all movements. Therefore, although the treatise separately quotes sutras to argue, its meaning contains the previous intent. As the following text says: 'Since taking and discarding are the mind, and gain and loss are the body, isn't it all the movement of exhausting delusions and proving principles?' Therefore, the reason for criticizing movement is to illustrate that moving is constantly still, and stillness is constantly moving, which is the practice of non-abiding, where both phenomena and principles are cultivated. Otherwise, how can one attain the fruit of 'Nirvana' (the state of non-birth and non-death)?
Someone says: The sutra states that above the 'Dharmakaya' (the true body of the Buddha) one has already entered the realm of 'non-action' (non-contrivance), the mind cannot be understood by wisdom, the form cannot be measured by images, the body has severed the 'skandhas' (five aggregates) and 'ayatanas' (twelve entrances), and the mind and wisdom are extinguished. But it also says: 'Advance in cultivating the three positions, accumulating merit and virtue more extensively.' The 'Fang Guang Sutra' jointly shows the Bodhisattva entering the 'Bhumis' (stages of Bodhisattva practice). The mind realizes 'Tathata' (the true nature of all things), and is free from discrimination, so wisdom cannot know it. Taking the Dharma as the body, so the image cannot be measured. When one reaches the seventh 'Bhumi' (the 'Far-Going Ground'), the body and mind are without form, how can one further cultivate the three 'Bhumis' that follow? Isn't this movement?
Advancing in cultivation is originally due to love and pursuit, and accumulating merit arises from traversing and seeking. Love and pursuit will have the emotions and views of taking and discarding, and traversing and seeking will have the alternation of gain and loss. The first two sentences investigate the cause, saying that the mind has love and pursuit for higher positions, so it must cultivate the more excellent parts; the body has traversed and sought numerous merits, so it must exceed its own duty. The last two sentences show the faults in it, taking the latter and discarding the former.
損障益德。皆分別之動。
既以取捨為心。損益為體。而曰體絕陰入心智寂滅。此文乖致(旨)殊。而會之一人 以此四者身心兩現。如何乃云體絕(云云)文義既殊動靜互戾。會屬於儒童一人如何。
無異指南為北。以曉迷夫也 南喻動北喻寂。經中雲寂云動。令人服行。既二理相違。如何準的。譬之慾北而反指南。若今謂寂而反示動。何以令迷夫行人曉解耶。南北喻動靜者。南為朱明故喻動。北為玄冥故喻寂。
動寂第十五 十演之八也。法身已上行行合真即相無相。焉有動而不寂。寂而不動耶。今標動靜不云寂動者。以問中但譏其動。意謂動則違寂。不知動時全寂。故云動寂。然稟實教之行者悟理起行。不揀凡夫。況七地乎。演此顯無住之因。方契無住之果矣。
無名曰。經稱聖人無為而無所不為 放光二十四云。佛言。適無所為故。行般若波羅蜜等。無為寂也。無所不為動也。寂不妨動故。
無為故。雖動而常寂。無所不為故。雖寂而常動。雖寂而常動故。物莫能一。雖動而常寂故。物莫能二。物莫能二故。逾動逾寂。物莫能一故。逾寂逾動 初四句相躡顯動寂無違。次四句顯二法非一非異。后四句躡前。釋成二行雙流。
所以為即無為無為即為。動寂雖殊。而莫之可
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『損障益德』（減少業障，增加功德），都是分別心的作用。
既然以取捨為心，以損益為體，卻又說『體絕陰入，心智寂滅』。這段文字的意義乖違，卻要會歸於儒童（指維摩詰）一人。用這四者（指損、益、取、舍）身心兩方面都顯現，怎麼能說『體絕』呢？文字意義既然不同，動與靜又互相矛盾，怎麼能歸屬於儒童一人呢？
這無異於用指南針指向北方，來開導迷惑的人啊！南方比喻動，北方比喻寂。經中既說寂，又說動，讓人遵從修行。既然兩種道理相互違背，如何作為準則呢？譬如想要去北方卻反而用指南針指向南方，如果現在說寂卻反而顯示動，怎麼能讓迷惑的修行人曉悟理解呢？用南北比喻動靜，是因為南方是朱明之位，所以比喻動；北方是玄冥之位，所以比喻寂。
『動寂第十五』，是十演中的第八。法身（Dharmakaya）以上的菩薩，行行都與真理相合，即相即無相，哪裡會有動而不寂，寂而不動的情況呢？現在標出動靜，卻不說寂動，是因為提問的人只是譏諷其動，認為動就違背了寂，不知道動的時候完全是寂。所以說動寂。然而稟承實教的修行人，悟理而起行，不分凡夫，更何況是七地菩薩呢？演說這個道理，是爲了顯現無住的因，才能契合無住的果啊。
無名曰：經中稱聖人『無為而無所不為』。『放光二十四』中說：佛說：『正因為無所為，所以行般若波羅蜜（Prajna Paramita）等。』無為就是寂，無所不為就是動。寂不妨礙動。
因為無為，所以雖然動卻常常是寂；因為無所不為，所以雖然寂卻常常是動。雖然寂卻常常是動，所以事物沒有能成為一的；雖然動卻常常是寂，所以事物沒有能成為二的。事物沒有能成為二，所以越動越寂；事物沒有能成為一，所以越寂越動。最初四句相互承接，顯示動寂沒有違背。接著四句顯示二法非一非異。最後四句承接前面，解釋成就二行雙流。
所以說為就是無為，無為就是為。動寂雖然不同，卻沒有什麼可以……
【English Translation】 English version 『Reducing hindrances and increasing merits』 are both actions of discrimination.
Since taking and rejecting are taken as the mind, and decreasing and increasing as the substance, yet it is said, 『The body is cut off from yin entry, and the wisdom of the mind is extinguished.』 The meaning of this passage is contradictory, yet it is to be attributed to the one Vimalakirti (meaning: stainless fame). With these four (referring to decreasing, increasing, taking, and rejecting) manifesting in both body and mind, how can it be said that 『the body is cut off』? Since the meanings of the words are different, and movement and stillness contradict each other, how can they be attributed to the one Vimalakirti?
This is no different from using a compass pointing south to enlighten a confused person! South is a metaphor for movement, and north is a metaphor for stillness. The sutra speaks of both stillness and movement, causing people to follow and practice. Since the two principles contradict each other, how can they be taken as a standard? It is like wanting to go north but instead using a compass pointing south. If now stillness is spoken of but movement is shown instead, how can it enable confused practitioners to understand? Using south and north as metaphors for movement and stillness is because south is the position of Zhu Ming, hence it is a metaphor for movement; north is the position of Xuan Ming, hence it is a metaphor for stillness.
『Movement and Stillness, the Fifteenth』 is the eighth of the Ten Evolutions. Bodhisattvas above the Dharmakaya (meaning: the body of the Dharma) level, in every action, accord with the truth, being both form and formless. How could there be movement without stillness, or stillness without movement? Now, movement and stillness are highlighted, but not stillness and movement, because the questioner only criticizes the movement, thinking that movement violates stillness, not knowing that movement is entirely stillness. Therefore, it is said movement and stillness. However, practitioners who follow the true teachings, awaken to the principle and arise in practice, do not discriminate against ordinary people, let alone seventh-ground Bodhisattvas? Expounding this principle is to reveal the cause of non-abiding, so as to accord with the fruit of non-abiding.
Wu Ming said: The sutra calls the sage 『non-acting yet there is nothing that is not done.』 『Radiant Light Twenty-four』 says: The Buddha said, 『Precisely because there is nothing to be done, therefore one practices Prajna Paramita (meaning: perfection of wisdom), etc.』 Non-action is stillness, and there is nothing that is not done is movement. Stillness does not hinder movement.
Because of non-action, although there is movement, it is always stillness; because there is nothing that is not done, although there is stillness, it is always movement. Although there is stillness, it is always movement, therefore things cannot become one; although there is movement, it is always stillness, therefore things cannot become two. Because things cannot become two, the more movement, the more stillness; because things cannot become one, the more stillness, the more movement. The first four sentences are interconnected, showing that movement and stillness are not contradictory. The next four sentences show that the two dharmas are neither one nor different. The last four sentences follow the previous ones, explaining and accomplishing the dual flow of the two practices.
Therefore, it is said that action is non-action, and non-action is action. Although movement and stillness are different, there is nothing that can be...
異也 承前三對之文。一致已明。此但結成前所引經。通答進修之動。既為即無為。如何進修三位。一句屬動。
道行雲。心亦不有亦不無 即彼經初卷中文。據前問中。身心各說。以進修是取捨之心。積德是涉求之身。今答中初答進修。引為不為之文。意復屬身以執行由身故。今答積德。而卻引心亦不有之文。意以涉求豈非是心。大底行由身運身由心策。身心相應互舉皆可。況法身菩薩證心成身。未嘗宛異不惟動寂無殊。亦乃身心一致。
不有者。不若(似)有心之有。不無者。不若無心之無 義如下釋。
何者。(徴)有心則眾庶是也。無心則太虛是也。眾庶止於妄想。太虛絕於靈照。豈可止於妄想絕於靈照。標其神道而語聖心者哉 眾庶謂凡夫。初二句指體。次二句彰過。豈可下正揀。
是以聖心不有。不可謂之無。聖心不無。不可謂之有 為斥二見故。言非有非無。豈可聞說非有。卻計是無等。謂者計謂之謂。
不有故。心想都滅。不無故。理無不契。理無不契故。萬德斯弘。心想都滅故。功成非我 初二句離過。次二句證理。次二句初由契理。恒沙佛法一一隨理周遍法界。后二句由心想滅故功皆無相。無容我證我為。如何乃至積德起于涉求哉。
所以應化無方未嘗有
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『異也』，承接前面三對問答的文意。『一致』的道理已經很明顯。這裡只是總結前面所引用的經文，總的回答了關於『進修』的疑問。既然『即無為』，又如何『進修三位』？『一句屬動』，指的是哪一句？
『道行雲。心亦不有亦不無』，出自《道行般若經》初卷中的文字。根據前面的提問，身和心是分別來說的。因為『進修』是取捨之心，『積德』是涉求之身。現在回答中，首先回答『進修』，引用『不為』的文句，意思是仍然屬於身，因為執行是由身來完成的。現在回答『積德』，卻引用『心亦不有』的文句，意思是涉求難道不是心嗎？總的來說，行動由身體執行，身體的執行由心來策動。身心相應，互相舉例都可以。何況法身菩薩證心成身，從來沒有完全不同。不僅動和寂沒有差別，而且身心是一致的。
『不有者。不若(似)有心之有。不無者。不若無心之無』，意義如下面的解釋。
『何者』（征問），『有心則眾庶是也。無心則太虛是也。眾庶止於妄想。太虛絕於靈照。豈可止於妄想絕於靈照。標其神道而語聖心者哉』？『眾庶』指的是凡夫。前兩句指本體，后兩句彰顯過失。『豈可』以下是正式的揀擇。
『是以聖心不有。不可謂之無。聖心不無。不可謂之有』，爲了駁斥兩種偏見，所以說非有非無。怎麼可以聽說非有，就認為是無等等。『謂』是計謂的意思。
『不有故。心想都滅。不無故。理無不契。理無不契故。萬德斯弘。心想都滅故。功成非我』，前兩句是離開過失，后兩句是證明道理。接下來的兩句，首先是因為契合理性，恒河沙數般的佛法，一一隨著理性周遍法界。最後兩句，因為心想滅除，所以功德都是無相的，沒有容我證悟，我作為的餘地。怎麼會乃至積德起于涉求呢？
『所以應化無方未嘗有』。
【English Translation】 English version 'Yi Ye (異也, Different also)' continues the meaning of the previous three pairs of questions and answers. The principle of 'consistency' is already clear. This simply concludes the scriptures quoted earlier, answering the question of 'cultivation' in general. Since 'being identical to non-action (即無為, ji wu wei)', how can one 'cultivate the three positions (進修三位, jin xiu san wei)'? Which sentence does 'a sentence belongs to action (一句屬動, yi ju shu dong)' refer to?
'Dao Xing Yun (道行雲, The Dao Xing Sutra says). The mind is neither existent nor non-existent (心亦不有亦不無, xin yi bu you yi bu wu)', comes from the text in the first volume of the Dao Xing Ban Ruo Jing (道行般若經, Dao Xing Prajna Sutra). According to the previous questions, the body and mind are discussed separately. Because 'cultivation (進修, jin xiu)' is the mind of taking and discarding, and 'accumulating virtue (積德, ji de)' is the body of involvement and seeking. Now, in the answer, the first answer is 'cultivation', quoting the sentence of 'non-action (不為, bu wei)', meaning that it still belongs to the body, because the operation is completed by the body. Now, answering 'accumulating virtue', it quotes the sentence 'the mind is also not existent (心亦不有, xin yi bu you)', meaning that involvement and seeking is not the mind? In general, action is operated by the body, and the operation of the body is driven by the mind. Body and mind correspond, and examples can be given to each other. Moreover, the Dharmakaya Bodhisattva (法身菩薩, Fa Shen Pu Sa) proves the mind to become the body, and has never been completely different. Not only is there no difference between movement and stillness, but also the body and mind are consistent.
'Not existent (不有者, bu you zhe). It is not like the existence of a mindful mind. Not non-existent (不無者, bu wu zhe). It is not like the non-existence of a mindless mind', the meaning is as explained below.
'What (何者, he zhe)' (questioning), 'A mindful mind is like the masses (眾庶, zhong shu). A mindless mind is like the great void (太虛, tai xu). The masses stop at delusion. The great void is cut off from spiritual illumination. How can one stop at delusion and cut off from spiritual illumination? To mark its divine path and speak of the sacred mind (聖心, sheng xin)?' 'The masses' refers to ordinary people. The first two sentences refer to the substance, and the last two sentences highlight the fault. 'How can' below is the formal selection.
'Therefore, the sacred mind is not existent. It cannot be said to be non-existent. The sacred mind is not non-existent. It cannot be said to be existent', in order to refute the two prejudices, it is said to be neither existent nor non-existent. How can one hear that it is non-existent and think that it is non-existent, etc.? 'Wei (謂)' means to plan and say.
'Because it is not existent. Thoughts are all extinguished. Because it is not non-existent. The principle is in harmony with everything. Because the principle is in harmony with everything. All virtues are promoted. Because thoughts are all extinguished. The merit is accomplished without self', the first two sentences are to leave the fault, and the last two sentences are to prove the truth. The next two sentences, first because of the principle of harmony, the Ganges sand-like Buddhadharma (佛法, Fo Fa), one by one with the principle throughout the Dharma Realm (法界, Fa Jie). The last two sentences, because the mind is extinguished, all merits are without form, there is no room for me to prove, I as a place. How can it be that accumulating virtue arises from involvement and seeking?
'Therefore, responding to transformation is boundless and never existent'.
為。寂然不動未嘗不為。經曰。心無所行無所不行。信矣 答問至此大理已明。前結后證文皆可了。所引之經亦義引大品等。如無作品云。菩薩行般若不行色。為行般若。不行受想等為行般若等。自此已下廣會教理。旨不異前。
儒童曰。昔我于無數劫。以國財身命施人無數。以妄想心則非為施也。今以無生心五華施佛。始名施爾。又空行菩薩入空解脫門。方言。今是行時非謂證時 智論第十六云。我于無量劫中。頭目髓腦以施眾生。合其愿滿。乃至慇勤精進求此功德。欲具足五波羅蜜。我是時未有所得。見然燈佛。以五華施佛。布發泥中得無生法忍。即時六波羅蜜滿等。釋曰。七地已前智相未盡故。三輪未或全空。住相行施非真施也。以不順真故。施既如此戒等皆然。舉一例諸也。至無相地。智相已亡。無生又證施無所住。冥然契真。施雖五花之鮮。勝前身命之多。蹄涔海量何敢相望。施華之緣如本行經。又空行下放光二十略云。菩薩行空無相無愿三昧等。今正是行五波羅蜜時。非是證時。皆顯動寂無妨。
然則心彌虛行彌廣。終日行不乖于無行者也 謂行行忘相。動而恒寂。
是以賢劫稱無舍之檀。成具美不為之為。禪典唱無緣之慈。思益演不知之知 梵云檀那。此云佈施。賢劫經說。一切諸
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：因此，寂然不動並非不作為。經書上說：『心無所行，無所不行。』真是這樣啊！回答問題到這裡，大道理已經明白了。前面總結，後面論證，文章都可以理解了。所引用的經文也是引用《大品般若經》等。例如《無作品經》說：『菩薩行般若，不行色。為行般若，不行受想等，為行般若等。』從這裡以下廣泛地彙集教義和道理，主旨與前面沒有不同。
儒童說：『過去我在無數劫中，用國財身命佈施給無數人，但以妄想心來佈施，就不是真正的佈施。現在以無生心用五朵鮮花供養佛，才算是真正的佈施。』又，空行菩薩進入空解脫門，才說：『現在是修行的時候，不是證悟的時候。』《大智度論》第十六卷說：『我于無量劫中，頭目髓腦都佈施給眾生，爲了滿足他們的願望，乃至慇勤精進地尋求這種功德，想要具足五波羅蜜（Pa^ramita，佈施、持戒、忍辱、精進、禪定），但那時我還沒有得到什麼。直到見到然燈佛（Dipamkara Buddha），用五朵鮮花供養佛，並將頭髮鋪在泥土中，才得到無生法忍。』即時六波羅蜜（加上智慧）圓滿等等。』解釋說：『七地菩薩以前，智相還沒有完全消除，所以三輪（施者、受者、施物）沒有完全空掉。住于相上來行佈施，不是真正的佈施。因為不順應真如本性，所以佈施是這樣，持戒等等也都是這樣。舉一個例子，其他的都可以類推。』到了無相地，智相已經消亡，無生之理也已經證得，佈施時不住于任何事物，默默地契合真如。所以佈施即使是五朵鮮花這樣微薄的東西，也勝過之前佈施身命的功德。蹄印中的水和大海的容量，怎麼敢相比呢？佈施鮮花的因緣，如《本行經》所說。又，空行下放光二十略說：『菩薩行空、無相、無愿三昧等等。現在正是修行五波羅蜜的時候，不是證悟的時候。』這些都顯示了動與寂互不妨礙。
既然如此，心越空虛，行為就越廣大。終日修行而不違背無為的境界。』意思是說，修行時忘掉一切相，動中恒常寂靜。
因此，賢劫經稱讚佈施為『無舍之檀』，成就完美的不作為。禪宗經典歌頌『無緣大慈』，思益經闡述『不知之知』。梵語檀那（Da^na），這裡翻譯為佈施。《賢劫經》說，一切諸
【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, being still and unmoving does not mean not acting. The scripture says, 'The mind does not abide anywhere, yet there is nowhere it does not reach.' Truly so! Having answered the questions up to this point, the great principle is already clear. The preceding summary and subsequent proofs make the text understandable. The quoted scriptures are also drawn from the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra and others. For example, the No-Action Sutra says, 'The Bodhisattva practices prajna (wisdom) but does not practice form. Is it practicing prajna? It does not practice sensation, thought, etc. Is it practicing prajna?' From here onwards, the teachings and principles are extensively gathered, and the main point is no different from before.
The Youth said, 'In the past, in countless kalpas (aeons), I gave away my country's wealth, body, and life to countless people, but with a deluded mind, it was not true giving. Now, with a mind of non-origination, I offer five flowers to the Buddha, and this is truly called giving.' Furthermore, when the Bodhisattva of Empty Practice enters the gate of empty liberation, he says, 'Now is the time for practice, not the time for realization.' The sixteenth chapter of the Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra says, 'In immeasurable kalpas, I have given my head, eyes, marrow, and brain to sentient beings to fulfill their wishes, and I have diligently and vigorously sought this merit, desiring to perfect the five Paramitas (Da^na, Sila, Ksanti, Virya, Dhyana). At that time, I had not yet attained anything. Upon seeing Dipamkara Buddha, I offered five flowers to the Buddha and spread my hair in the mud, and I attained the forbearance of non-origination.' Immediately, the six Paramitas (including wisdom) were perfected, and so on. The explanation says, 'Before the seventh Bhumi (stage of a Bodhisattva), the aspect of wisdom has not yet been completely exhausted, so the three wheels (giver, receiver, and gift) are not completely empty. Giving while dwelling in appearances is not true giving. Because it does not accord with true suchness, giving is like this, and precepts, etc., are all like this. By giving one example, all others can be inferred.' Upon reaching the stage of no-appearance, the aspect of wisdom has already vanished, and the principle of non-origination has also been realized. Giving without dwelling on anything, silently merging with true suchness. Therefore, even the offering of five flowers, which is so small, surpasses the merit of giving away one's body and life before. How can the water in a hoofprint be compared to the ocean? The cause of offering flowers is as described in the Fundamental Conduct Sutra. Furthermore, the twentieth chapter of Empty Practice briefly says, 'The Bodhisattva practices emptiness, non-appearance, and the vowless samadhi, etc. Now is the time for practicing the five Paramitas, not the time for realization.' All of this shows that movement and stillness do not hinder each other.
Since this is the case, the emptier the mind, the broader the action. Practicing all day long does not contradict the state of non-action.' This means that in practice, one forgets all appearances, and in movement, there is constant stillness.
Therefore, the Bhadrakalpa Sutra praises giving as 'the Dana (Da^na) of no-giving,' accomplishing perfect non-action. The Chan (Zen) classics sing of 'unconditional great compassion,' and the Vimalakirti Nirdesa Sutra expounds 'unknowing knowledge.' The Sanskrit word Dana (Da^na) is translated here as giving. The Bhadrakalpa Sutra says that all
法無有與者。是曰佈施。成具經云。不為而過為。禪經說。慈心三昧有無緣之慈。思益經略云。無取捨之知方為知矣。
聖旨幽玄殊文同辨 文雖四異。旨則一貫而玄通。
豈可以有為便有為。無為便無為哉。菩薩住盡不盡平等法門。不盡有為。不住無為。即其事也 初二句責其動靜異見。菩薩下引經顯理。即名經略云。上方香積世界菩薩欲還本國。向佛求法。佛言。有盡無盡解脫法門。汝等當學(云云)如菩薩者不盡有為。不住無為。彼疏解云。有為雖偽。舍之而大業不成。無為雖實。住之而慧心不明。即其事者。同前動寂無礙。若有無異見豈順經義。既云平等。則盡與不盡其行一也。
而以南北為喻。殊非領會之唱(說) 領謂領納。會謂契會。云庵云。南北之方定異。寂動二行常一。將定異喻常一。豈能領會也。
窮源第十六 九折之八也。窮謂窮討。源謂根源。云庵云。由前章已知一乘正行動寂同時。今則行成必證。未識能證之人與所證之法。誰先誰后。隨一為源二俱有過。故今窮之。
有名曰。非眾生無以御(控進)三乘。非三乘無以成涅槃。然必先有眾生。後有涅槃 反顯也。意云。由先有眾生。然後控御三乘之因。證涅槃之果。此立理也。然必下定先後。
是則
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『法無有與者』，意思是說，真正的佛法是無法給予或接受的，因為一切法性本空，無所從來，亦無所去，這便是『佈施』的真諦。《成具經》中說，不應該做的事情反而去做了，這是錯誤的。《禪經》中說，慈心三昧包含『無緣之慈』，即不附加任何條件、無分別的慈愛。《思益經》簡略地說，不執著于取捨分別的智慧，才是真正的智慧。
聖人的旨意雖然深奧玄妙，但不同的文字表達的道理卻是相同的。文字的表達方式雖然有四種不同，但其所要表達的宗旨卻是一致的，並且是玄妙通達的。
難道可以因為『有為』就執著于『有為』，因為『無為』就執著于『無為』嗎？菩薩安住于『盡』與『不盡』的平等法門中，既不捨棄『有為』，也不執著于『無為』，這就是其中的道理。最初的兩句是責備那些對動與靜持有不同見解的人。『菩薩下引經顯理』，即引用經典來闡明道理。《經》中略說，上方香積世界的菩薩想要返回自己的國土，向佛陀請教佛法。佛陀說：『有盡無盡解脫法門，你們應當學習。』就像菩薩那樣，既不捨棄『有為』，也不執著于『無為』。疏解中說：『有為雖然是虛假的，但捨棄它就無法成就偉大的事業；無為雖然是真實的，但執著於它就會使智慧之心不明。』這與前面所說的動與靜之間沒有障礙是相同的。如果對『有』和『無』持有不同的見解，又怎麼能順應經義呢？既然說是『平等』，那麼『盡』與『不盡』，它們的行為就是一樣的。
而用南北方來比喻，實在不是領悟理解佛法的說法。『領』是領納，『會』是契合領會。云庵說：『南北方位確實不同，但寂靜和行動這兩種修行方式卻始終是一致的。』用確定的不同來比喻始終如一，怎麼能夠領悟理解佛法呢？
窮源第十六，是九折中的第八折。『窮』是窮盡探究，『源』是根源。云庵說：『從前面的章節已經知道一乘正道是行動和寂靜同時進行的。現在修行必定證果，但還不清楚能證之人與所證之法，誰先誰后。認為其中一個為根源，兩種都是錯誤的。所以現在要窮盡探究。』
有人說：如果沒有眾生，就無法引導（控制和引導）三乘；如果沒有三乘，就無法成就涅槃。因此必定先有眾生，後有涅槃。這是從反面來顯明。意思是說，因為先有眾生，然後才能控制和引導三乘之因，證得涅槃之果。這是立論。『然必下定先後』，是確定先後順序。
【English Translation】 English version: 『法無有與者』 (dharma has no giver or receiver) means that true Dharma cannot be given or received, because all dharmas are inherently empty, coming from nowhere and going nowhere. This is the true essence of 『佈施』 (dāna, giving). The 『成具經』 (Chengju Sutra) says that it is wrong to do what should not be done. The 『禪經』 (Dhyana Sutra) says that 『慈心三昧』 (loving-kindness samadhi) includes 『無緣之慈』 (unconditional loving-kindness), which is loving-kindness without any conditions or distinctions. The 『思益經』 (Vimalakirti Nirdesa Sutra) briefly says that the wisdom of not clinging to acceptance and rejection is true wisdom.
The intention of the sages is profound and mysterious, but the principles expressed by different texts are the same. Although the ways of expressing the text are four different, the purpose they want to express is consistent, and it is mysterious and accessible.
Can we cling to 『有為』 (yuwei, conditioned action) simply because there is 『有為』 (yuwei, conditioned action), or cling to 『無為』 (wuwei, unconditioned action) simply because there is 『無為』 (wuwei, unconditioned action)? Bodhisattvas abide in the equal Dharma gate of 『盡』 (jin, exhaustion) and 『不盡』 (bujin, inexhaustion), neither abandoning 『有為』 (yuwei, conditioned action) nor clinging to 『無為』 (wuwei, unconditioned action). This is the principle. The first two sentences are to blame those who hold different views on movement and stillness. 『菩薩下引經顯理』 (Bodhisattva cites scriptures to reveal the principle) means citing scriptures to clarify the principle. The 『經』 (Sutra) briefly says that the Bodhisattvas of the upper Fragrant Accumulation World wanted to return to their own country and asked the Buddha for Dharma. The Buddha said: 『There is the Dharma gate of exhaustion and inexhaustion liberation, you should learn it.』 Just like the Bodhisattvas, they neither abandon 『有為』 (yuwei, conditioned action) nor cling to 『無為』 (wuwei, unconditioned action). The commentary says: 『Although conditioned action is false, abandoning it will not accomplish great deeds; although unconditioned action is real, clinging to it will obscure the wisdom mind.』 This is the same as the previous saying that there is no obstacle between movement and stillness. If you hold different views on 『有』 (existence) and 『無』 (non-existence), how can you follow the meaning of the scriptures? Since it is said to be 『equal』, then 『盡』 (jin, exhaustion) and 『不盡』 (bujin, inexhaustion), their actions are the same.
Using the north and south directions as a metaphor is really not a way to understand the Dharma. 『領』 (ling, to receive) is to receive, 『會』 (hui, to understand) is to understand and comprehend. Yun An said: 『The north and south directions are indeed different, but the two practices of stillness and action are always the same.』 Using definite differences to compare what is always the same, how can you understand the Dharma?
Exhausting the Source, the Sixteenth, is the eighth of the nine folds. 『窮』 (qiong, to exhaust) is to exhaustively investigate, 『源』 (yuan, source) is the root. Yun An said: 『From the previous chapters, we already know that the One Vehicle Path is the simultaneous practice of action and stillness. Now, practice will surely lead to fruition, but it is not yet clear who comes first, the person who can realize and the Dharma that is realized. Considering one of them as the source is wrong in both cases. Therefore, we must now exhaustively investigate.』
Someone says: If there were no sentient beings, there would be no way to guide (control and guide) the Three Vehicles; if there were no Three Vehicles, there would be no way to achieve Nirvana. Therefore, there must be sentient beings first, and then Nirvana. This is to clarify from the opposite side. It means that because there are sentient beings first, then can we control and guide the cause of the Three Vehicles and attain the fruit of Nirvana. This is the argument. 『然必下定先後』 (ran bi xiading xianhou, but it is necessary to determine the order) is to determine the order.
涅槃有始。有始必有終 有始終生滅之過。何故前引經云。無始無終。又云。六趣不能生。力負不能化。
而經曰。涅槃無始無終。湛若虛空。則涅槃先有 本經二十一云。涅槃非始非終等。虛空為喻。在經多有。
非復學而後成者也 有不因修成之過。涅槃既先則性自圓成。非由修學而後成就。何須行三乘之行耶。
通古第十七 十演之九也。通同也。古先也。意云。涅槃之體性出自古無始無終。今三乘之智本是即理之智。不證則已。證則冥通。何有即理之智證即智之理。尚分今古之異而不通同。故生公云。若尋其趣乃是我始會之非照今有。照不在今。即是莫先為大。既云大矣。所以稱常。故下云。理而成聖聖不異理。演此明證窮自性同自性也。
無名曰。夫至人空洞無象。而萬物無非我(心)造 聖人與理冥一。故云無象。萬物下心雖寂然。亦不離諸法。以一切法皆心所起。
會萬物以成己者。其唯聖人乎 會證會也。聖人了法即心。前則依性起相。此則會相歸心。所以成聖。楞嚴經云。一切眾生從無始來。迷己為物。失於本心為物所轉。若能轉物即同如來。云庵云。昔石頭和尚讀至於此。遂豁然大悟曰。聖人無己靡所不己。法身無相誰云自他。圓鑒虛照于其間。萬象體玄而自現
。
何則(徴)非理不聖非聖不理。理而成聖者。聖不異理也 初二句明心境互成。若不證於萬物性空之理。何以成聖人。若非聖智。亦不見性空之理。此則同前般若論中內外相與而成功。后二句明心境非異。初一句躡前。既證理為聖。聖智豈異於理耶。此明聖智與理通同。顯無古今先後之異。
故天帝曰。般若當於何求。善吉曰。不可於色中求。亦不可離色中求。又曰。見緣起為見法。見法為見佛 初文即大品散花品文。般若即能證之心。色即所證之境。舉色例諸。萬法皆然。不可於色中求者。由心境非一故。不可離者。由心境非異故。以色即是空空即如境。如外無智。故言不離。又曰下即涅槃文。緣起即十二因緣也。法即空性佛即覺智。見緣起性空之理。即為見佛。如智非異。
斯則物我不異之效也 物即境也。即物明如故我即心也。約聖稱我故畢竟證會。涅槃非先三乘非后。
所以至人戢玄機于未兆。藏冥運于即化。總六合以鏡心。一去來以成體 前引聖教。以明理智冥符二而不二。以為定量。方明至人以智契理。亦寂然冥通。戢止也。亦斂也。玄機智也。未兆謂智證理時。全用歸體不存眹兆。清涼大師云。智體無自即是證如。冥寂也。運動也。即如智之合稱。化謂萬化即就也。意云
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
什麼叫做『非理不聖，非聖不理』呢？因為通達真理才能成就聖人，而聖人的境界與真理並無二致。前兩句說明心與境互相成就。如果不證悟萬物性空的真理，又如何能成為聖人呢？如果沒有聖人的智慧，也無法見到性空的真理。這與之前《般若論》中內外相互作用而成功的道理相同。后兩句說明心與境並非不同。第一句承接前文，既然證悟真理才能成為聖人，那麼聖人的智慧又怎麼會與真理相異呢？這說明聖人的智慧與真理是相通的，沒有古今先後的區別。
所以天帝釋提桓因（Śakra）問：『般若（Prajñā，智慧）應當在哪裡求得？』善吉（Subhuti）回答說：『不能在色（Rūpa，物質現象）中求得，也不能離開色而求得。』又說：『見到緣起（Pratītyasamutpāda，因緣生法）就是見到法（Dharma，佛法），見到法就是見到佛（Buddha，覺悟者）。』最初的引文出自《大品般若經·散花品》。般若即是能證悟的心，色即是所證悟的境。以色為例，萬法都是如此。不能在色中求得，是因為心與境並非一體；不能離開色而求得，是因為心與境並非相異。因為色即是空，空即是色，如境之外沒有智慧，所以說不離。後面的引文出自《涅槃經》。緣起即是十二因緣。法即是空性，佛即是覺悟的智慧。見到緣起性空的真理，就是見到佛，如智並非相異。
這就是物與我不異的效用。物即是境，即物而明瞭如如之理，我即是心，因為是對聖人而言，所以稱『我』，最終證悟體會到，涅槃（Nirvāṇa，寂滅）並非在三乘（Śrāvakayāna，聲聞乘；Pratyekabuddhayāna，緣覺乘；Bodhisattvayāna，菩薩乘）之前，也非在其後。
所以，至人將玄妙的機要藏於未顯現之時，將冥昧的執行藏於變化之中，總括天地六合來映照內心，將一切的來去變化融合成一體。前面引用聖教，是爲了說明理與智暗合，二而不二，作為定論。從而說明至人以智慧契合理體，也是寂然冥通的。『戢』是止息，也是收斂的意思。『玄機』是智慧。『未兆』是指智慧證悟真理時，全部作用歸於本體，不留任何痕跡。清涼澄觀大師說：『智體無自性，即是證悟如如之理。』『冥寂』是寂靜，『運動』是執行，『即如智』是如如之理與智慧的合稱。『化』是指萬物的變化，『即就』是成就的意思。意思是說
【English Translation】 English version:
What does it mean to say 'Without principle, there is no sage; without a sage, there is no principle'? It is because one attains sagehood by understanding the truth, and the state of a sage is no different from the truth itself. The first two sentences explain that the mind and the environment mutually accomplish each other. If one does not realize the truth of the emptiness of all things, how can one become a sage? Without the wisdom of a sage, one cannot see the truth of emptiness. This is the same as the principle in the previous Prajñā-論 (Treatise on Prajñā) where inner and outer interact to achieve success. The last two sentences explain that the mind and the environment are not different. The first sentence follows the previous text; since one becomes a sage by realizing the truth, how can the wisdom of a sage be different from the truth? This explains that the wisdom of a sage is connected to the truth, without any distinction of past, present, or future.
Therefore, Śakra (Śakra, the lord of the devas) said: 'Where should Prajñā (Prajñā, wisdom) be sought?' Subhuti (Subhuti) replied: 'It cannot be sought in Rūpa (Rūpa, material phenomena), nor can it be sought apart from Rūpa.' It also says: 'Seeing Pratītyasamutpāda (Pratītyasamutpāda, dependent origination) is seeing Dharma (Dharma, the Buddha's teachings), and seeing Dharma is seeing Buddha (Buddha, the enlightened one).' The initial quote is from the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra, Chapter on Scattering Flowers. Prajñā is the mind that can realize enlightenment, and Rūpa is the object of realization. Taking Rūpa as an example, all dharmas are like this. It cannot be sought in Rūpa because the mind and the environment are not one; it cannot be sought apart from Rūpa because the mind and the environment are not different. Because Rūpa is emptiness, and emptiness is Rūpa, there is no wisdom outside of the environment, so it is said that it is inseparable. The following quote is from the Nirvana Sutra. Pratītyasamutpāda is the twelve links of dependent origination. Dharma is emptiness, and Buddha is the wisdom of enlightenment. Seeing the truth of the emptiness of dependent origination is seeing the Buddha, as wisdom is not different.
This is the effect of the non-duality of things and self. Things are the environment, and understanding the suchness of things illuminates the principle of suchness. Self is the mind, and because it refers to a sage, it is called 'self'. Ultimately, one realizes and experiences that Nirvāṇa (Nirvāṇa, extinction) is not before the Three Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna, Hearer Vehicle; Pratyekabuddhayāna, Solitary Realizer Vehicle; Bodhisattvayāna, Bodhisattva Vehicle), nor is it after them.
Therefore, the perfect person conceals the subtle mechanism in the unmanifested, hides the obscure operation in the midst of transformation, encompasses the universe to mirror the mind, and integrates all coming and going into one entity. The previous citation of the sacred teachings is to illustrate that principle and wisdom secretly correspond, being two but not two, as a definitive conclusion. Thus, it explains that the perfect person uses wisdom to accord with the principle of the essence, also being silently and secretly connected. '戢 (jí)' means to stop, and also to restrain. '玄機 (xuán jī)' is wisdom. '未兆 (wèi zhào)' refers to when wisdom realizes the truth, all functions return to the essence, leaving no trace. Master Qingliang (澄觀, Chéngguān) said: 'The essence of wisdom has no self-nature, which is the realization of suchness.' '冥寂 (míng jì)' is stillness, '運動 (yùn dòng)' is operation, '即如智 (jí rú zhì)' is the combination of suchness and wisdom. '化 (huà)' refers to the transformation of all things, '即就 (jí jiù)' means accomplishment. The meaning is
。冥運之體即萬化之有。事顯理隱義言藏也。清涼大師云。冥真體于萬化之域。六合謂俗諦之有。以用也。謂總括六合之事。以為靈鑒之心。未有一法非心也。一去來下去謂過去。即古也。來謂未來。亦義兼現在今也。既混融三世為體。何古而弗通。前則統六合遍十方。此則該三世通今古。成體者。且約聖智初真俗融心境會。義言成爾。圭山云。無去無來。冥通三際。問佛用蘇漫多說。論主何以文為。答方便善巧逗華人之機。故封文之流謂言同俗。贊寧嘲其用文。慧達解其孟浪。以子愚瑣。頗求立言之意。如達師不害於文矣。故今定解。但用內義而釋雅言。令知論主文托于彼。義屬於此。
古今通始終同窮本極末。莫之與二。浩然太均乃曰涅槃 顯前心境冥寂之體也。初句中約終教辨。如大疏云。心冥至道混一古今。約頓教則一念不生前後際斷。何古何今。依圓教則古今二相即入圓融。尤見通也。次句以始終同故。三乘涅槃初證非始。證極非終。本末即理事海波一濕故。浩然謂浩浩然廣多無際。太均謂情非情無差。染非染平等。未有一法非涅槃也。
經曰。不離諸法而得涅槃。又曰。諸法無邊故。菩提無邊 又曰下放光三十云。諸法無邊際故。般若波羅蜜亦無邊際等。引此證理智皆依諸法。即顯心境不異
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：冥運之體，即是萬化之有。事蹟顯現而真理隱藏，意義蘊含其中。清涼大師說：『在萬化的領域中體現深奧的真理。』六合指的是世俗諦的存在，是它的作用。總括六合之事，作為靈鑒之心。沒有哪一法不是心。『一去來下去』中的『去』指的是過去，也就是古代。『來』指的是未來，也兼有現在的含義，即今天。既然已經混融了過去、現在、未來三世為一體，那麼有什麼古代是不能通達的呢？前面是統攝六合，遍及十方，這裡則是包含三世，通達古今。成就本體，且以聖智最初真俗融和，心境會合來說，只是從意義上來說是這樣。圭山說：『無去無來，深遠地通達過去、現在、未來三際。』有人問：佛用蘇漫多（Sūmantra，善語）來說，論主為什麼用文字來表達？回答說：這是爲了方便善巧地適應華人的根機，所以用文字的流派，也就是用和世俗一樣的語言。贊寧嘲笑他用文字，慧達解釋他輕率孟浪，認為他像孩子一樣愚笨瑣碎，想要創立自己的言論。像慧達大師這樣，用文字並沒有什麼妨礙。所以現在確定解釋，只用內在的意義來解釋文雅的語言，讓人知道論主的文字寄託于那些文雅的語言，而意義則屬於這裡。 古今相通，始終相同，窮究根本，探尋末端，沒有兩樣。浩然太均，這就是涅槃（Nirvāṇa，寂滅）。顯現的是先前心境深遠寂靜的本體。第一句中，從終教的角度來辨析，如大疏所說：『心與至道冥合，混同古今。』從頓教的角度來說，就是一念不生，前後際斷，哪裡還有什麼古代和今天？依照圓教來說，古今兩種相即相入，圓融無礙，更加顯現了通達的含義。第二句因為始終相同，所以三乘涅槃最初的證悟不是開始，證悟的極點也不是終結。根本和末端，就是理和事如同大海的波浪一樣，都是一樣的濕潤。浩然，指的是浩浩蕩蕩，廣大眾多，沒有邊際。太均，指的是有情和無情沒有差別，染污和清凈平等無二，沒有哪一法不是涅槃。 經書上說：『不離諸法而得涅槃。』又說：『諸法無邊，所以菩提（Bodhi，覺悟）也無邊。』又說：下面放出光明三十云：『諸法沒有邊際，所以般若波羅蜜（Prajñāpāramitā，智慧到彼岸）也沒有邊際』等等。引用這些來證明理智都依賴於諸法，就顯現了心和境沒有差異。
【English Translation】 English version: The substance of the dark operation is the existence of all transformations. Events are manifest while principles are hidden, and meanings are contained within. Master Qingliang said: 'The profound truth is embodied in the realm of all transformations.' The Six Directions refer to the existence of the mundane truth, which is its function. It encompasses the affairs of the Six Directions as the mind of spiritual insight. There is no single dharma that is not the mind. 'Going, coming, going down, going' – 'going' refers to the past, which is ancient times. 'Coming' refers to the future, also implying the present, which is today. Since the three times – past, present, and future – have been blended into one entity, what ancient thing cannot be penetrated? The former governs the Six Directions and pervades the Ten Directions, while the latter encompasses the Three Times and penetrates the past and present. The accomplishment of the substance is discussed in terms of the initial fusion of the sacred wisdom, the true and the mundane, and the meeting of the mind and the environment. It is said to be accomplished in meaning. Guishan said: 'Without going or coming, profoundly penetrating the three junctures.' Someone asked: The Buddha uses Sūmantra (善語, good speech) to speak, why does the commentator use writing? The answer is: This is a skillful means to adapt to the capacity of the Chinese people, so the flow of writing is used, which is language like that of the mundane. Zan Ning mocked his use of writing, while Hui Da explained his rashness, considering him foolish and trivial like a child, wanting to establish his own theories. Like Master Hui Da, there is no harm in using writing. Therefore, now we determine the explanation, only using the inner meaning to interpret elegant language, so that people know that the commentator's writing is entrusted to those elegant languages, while the meaning belongs here. The past and present communicate, the beginning and end are the same, exhaustively investigating the root and exploring the end, there is no difference. Vast and uniform, this is Nirvāṇa (寂滅, extinction). What is manifested is the profound and tranquil substance of the previous mind and environment. In the first sentence, it is distinguished from the perspective of the final teaching, as the Great Commentary says: 'The mind merges with the ultimate path, blending the past and present.' From the perspective of the sudden teaching, it is that a single thought does not arise, the front and back junctures are cut off, where is there any past or present? According to the perfect teaching, the two aspects of past and present are mutually inclusive and enter into perfect harmony, further revealing the meaning of communication. The second sentence, because the beginning and end are the same, the initial realization of the three vehicles of Nirvāṇa is not the beginning, and the extreme point of realization is not the end. The root and the end are like the waves of the ocean of principle and phenomena, all equally wet. Vastness refers to being vast and boundless, extensive and numerous, without limit. Uniformity refers to sentient and non-sentient beings having no difference, defilement and purity being equal, there is no single dharma that is not Nirvāṇa. The scripture says: 'Without leaving the dharmas, one attains Nirvāṇa.' It also says: 'Because the dharmas are boundless, Bodhi (覺悟, enlightenment) is also boundless.' It also says: The lower emission of light thirty says: 'Because the dharmas have no boundaries, Prajñāpāramitā (智慧到彼岸, wisdom to the other shore) also has no boundaries,' and so on. Quoting these to prove that both reason and wisdom rely on the dharmas, it reveals that the mind and environment are not different.
也。二文互影。細尋可知。
以知涅槃之道存(在)于妙契。妙契之致本(因)乎冥一 以知者。依經求理。理自昭著貴于妙合。妙合之旨因乎忘智。內冥二而不二一亦遣矣。此文亦通包前義智會之時通於古也。
然則物不異我。我不異物。物我玄會。歸乎無極 如智玄寂寄言無極。非別有處如智歸矣。
進之弗先退之弗后。豈容終始於其間哉 進退約人。先後通約人法。三乘進而證之非先也。以無前際故。迷夫退而未證非后也。以無後際故。
天女曰。耆年解脫亦如何久 凈名經說。舍利弗問天女。止此室其已久如。曰如耆年解脫。舍利弗言。止此久也。天女(云云)。解云。耆年謂身子耆宿。身子所證解脫。豈屬久近之時。故云爾也。
考得第十八 九折之九也。考稽也。承前不離諸法而得涅槃。因之考稽。盡陰存陰違教違理。當何得乎。所以最後辨此者。謂從前抉擇悟修先後。義意已周。究竟證入最居於后故今考也。
有名曰。經云。眾生之性(體)極於五陰之內。又云。得涅槃者五陰都盡。譬猶燈滅 本經二十九云。離五陰已無別眾生。又云下初二句示眾生之體。五陰即體故。次二句示證相。法喻可知。
然則眾生之性。頓盡於五陰之內。涅槃之道獨。建於三有
之外。邈(遠)然殊(別)域。非復眾生得涅槃也 順經而違理也。以能得者五陰已盡于有內。所得者。涅槃獨立於有外。若云得者。有二違理。一盡陰誰得。二內外懸絕。
果若有得則眾生之性不止(唯)於五陰。必若止於五陰。則五陰不都盡。五陰若都盡。誰復得涅槃耶 存陰順理而卻違經。若定許得。余有二義。一應五陰之外更有眾生之性。五陰令盡。陰外之性令得。故今論云。果若有得(云云)二恐違以前經云極於五陰。豈許陰外更有生性耶。若此應合五陰不都斷盡。或盡粗存細或滅色存心。為能得者。必若都盡誰是能得耶。故論云。必若止於五陰(云云)此理已通亦違前經云五陰部盡。據此存盡皆違不可不考。此意明。三乘之教斷盡生死。轉得涅槃。不知二際無二。故假此問答。令悟即妄而真。
玄得第十九 十演之十也。前演證窮。此演得妙。不存得相而得曰玄。
無名曰。夫真由離起。(顯)偽因著生。著故有得。離故無名 忘得曰離。涅槃從此而顯。有得曰著。名相從此而生。無名者。猶云無得。對前避文。亦可由離故。得無名之理。
是以則(法)真者同真。法偽者同偽 法真離得智亦真矣。依偽生著。心念妄矣。
子以有得為得。故求得於有得耳。吾以無得為得
。故得在於無得也 有得者法偽。得亦無得。無得者則真。無得而得也。心經云。以無所得故。而得菩提。
且談論之作必先定其本。既論涅槃。不可離涅槃而語涅槃。若即(就)涅槃以興言。誰獨非涅槃。而欲得之耶 言隨法起。談真以真為本。說俗以俗為根。既談涅槃之體。正當如體而言。涅槃之體彌綸法界。未有一法而非涅槃。若此則本來即是更何論得。起信論云。一切諸法畢竟平等。即真即如(云云)。
何者(徴)夫涅槃之道妙盡常數。融(和)冶(銷)二儀。滌盪萬有。均天人同一異。內視不己見。返聽不我聞。未嘗有得。未嘗無得 初一句標體。次七句辨相。后二句雙絕。常數者。即三世有為事相等。此總示也。下別列。二儀即天地。萬有者。即緣生萬物。融冶故所以均天人。滌盪故所以同一異。顯自性涅槃無差別之相。內視下二句約見聞以辨。眼不循色曰內視。色之性空空無對觸。故云不己見。耳不循聲曰返聽。聲之性空空故亡音。故云不我聞。己我皆屬涅槃。知非身外故云己我。未嘗下可知。
經曰。涅槃非眾生。亦不異眾生。維摩詰言。若彌勒得滅度者。一切眾生亦當滅度。所以者何。一切眾生本性常滅。不復更滅 本經二十二云。如來非眾生非非眾生。以如來即涅槃故。可
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：所以說，真正的獲得在於無所得。那些認為有所得的人，實際上是落入了虛假的法相。真正的『得』也是『無得』。只有『無得』才是真諦。這就是『無得而得』的境界。《心經》說：『以無所得故，而得菩提』（因為沒有任何執著和追求，所以才能證得覺悟）。
而且，任何談論的開始都必須先確定其根本。既然要談論涅槃（Nirvana，寂滅），就不能脫離涅槃本身來談論涅槃。如果直接從涅槃出發來闡述，那麼誰又不是涅槃本身呢？又有什麼必要去追求涅槃呢？言語隨著法理而生起，談論真諦要以真諦為根本，講述世俗要以世俗為根基。既然要談論涅槃的本體，就應當如實地按照本體來闡述。涅槃的本體遍佈整個法界，沒有哪一法不是涅槃。如果這樣，那麼本來就是涅槃，又何必談論獲得呢？《起信論》說：『一切諸法畢竟平等，即真即如』（一切法最終都是平等無二的，這就是真如的境界）。
（提問）那麼，涅槃的道理，玄妙到了極點，超越了常規和數量，融合天地，滌盪萬物，使天人和眾生平等無異，向內觀察看不到自己的存在，向外傾聽聽不到任何聲音，未曾有所得，也未曾沒有所得。（回答）第一句標明涅槃的本體，接下來的七句辨析涅槃的現象，最後兩句超越一切對立。『常數』，指的是三世（過去、現在、未來）有為事物的規律和現象。這是總體的說明。下面分別列舉。『二儀』，指的是天地。『萬有』，指的是因緣和合而生的萬物。融合天地，所以能使天人和眾生平等；滌盪萬物，所以能使同一和差異消失。這顯示了自性涅槃沒有差別的相狀。『內視』下面的兩句，從見聞的角度來辨析。眼睛不追逐外在的色彩，叫做『內視』。色彩的本性是空性的，空性中沒有對立和接觸，所以說『不己見』。耳朵不追逐外在的聲音，叫做『返聽』。聲音的本性是空性的，空性中沒有聲音，所以說『不我聞』。『己』和『我』都屬於涅槃的範疇，知道不是身外之物，所以說是『己我』。『未嘗下』可以理解。
經書上說：涅槃不是眾生，但也不異於眾生。《維摩詰經》說：如果彌勒（Maitreya，未來佛）證得滅度，那麼一切眾生也應當證得滅度。為什麼呢？因為一切眾生的本性本來就是寂滅的，不需要再次滅度。《本經》第二十二卷說：如來（Tathagata，佛）不是眾生，也不是非眾生。因為如來就是涅槃的緣故。
【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, true attainment lies in non-attainment. Those who believe they have attained something are actually caught in false appearances. True 'attainment' is also 'non-attainment'. Only 'non-attainment' is the true essence. This is the state of 'attaining without attaining'. The Heart Sutra says: 'Because there is nothing to be attained, Bodhi (enlightenment) is attained'.
Moreover, any discussion must begin by establishing its foundation. Since we are discussing Nirvana (extinction of suffering), we cannot discuss Nirvana apart from Nirvana itself. If we speak from the perspective of Nirvana, then who is not Nirvana itself? And what is the need to seek Nirvana? Words arise from principles, discussing truth must be based on truth, and explaining the mundane must be rooted in the mundane. Since we are discussing the essence of Nirvana, we should explain it according to its true nature. The essence of Nirvana pervades the entire Dharma realm, and there is no Dharma that is not Nirvana. If this is the case, then we are already Nirvana, so what is the point of discussing attainment? The Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana says: 'All Dharmas are ultimately equal, which is Suchness'.
(Question) What is the path of Nirvana, which is so subtle and profound that it transcends the ordinary and numerical, merges heaven and earth, washes away all things, makes gods and humans equal, looking inward, one cannot see oneself, listening outward, one cannot hear anything, never having attained, and never not having attained? (Answer) The first sentence states the essence of Nirvana, the next seven sentences analyze the phenomena of Nirvana, and the last two sentences transcend all duality. 'Ordinary and numerical' refers to the laws and phenomena of conditioned things in the three times (past, present, and future). This is a general explanation. The following are specific examples. 'Heaven and earth' refers to the cosmos. 'All things' refers to all things that arise from conditions. Merging heaven and earth allows gods and humans to be equal; washing away all things eliminates sameness and difference. This reveals the non-discriminatory aspect of self-nature Nirvana. The two sentences below 'looking inward' analyze from the perspective of seeing and hearing. The eyes not chasing external colors is called 'looking inward'. The nature of color is emptiness, and there is no opposition or contact in emptiness, so it is said 'one cannot see oneself'. The ears not chasing external sounds is called 'listening outward'. The nature of sound is emptiness, and there is no sound in emptiness, so it is said 'one cannot hear anything'. 'Self' and 'other' both belong to the realm of Nirvana, knowing that it is not something external, so it is said 'self and other'. 'Never having attained' can be understood.
The scriptures say: Nirvana is not sentient beings, but it is not different from sentient beings. The Vimalakirti Sutra says: If Maitreya (the future Buddha) attains extinction, then all sentient beings should also attain extinction. Why? Because the nature of all sentient beings is originally extinct, and there is no need to be extinct again. The twenty-second chapter of this sutra says: The Tathagata (Buddha) is not sentient beings, nor is he non-sentient beings. Because the Tathagata is Nirvana.
義引也。二十九云。眾生佛性不一不二等。次引凈名。即初卷菩薩品文亦少別。彼云。諸佛知一切眾生畢竟寂滅。即涅槃相等。
此名滅度。在於無滅者也 生死空花本來不起。則已滅也。四流陽焰當相元空。則已度也。
然則眾生非眾生。誰為得之者。涅槃非涅槃。誰為可得者 然則者。因前而起。眾生本滅度。于滅度中能所總非。何為得相哉。
故放光云。菩提從有得耶。答曰。不也。從無得耶。答曰。不也。從有無得耶。答曰。不也。離有無得耶。答曰。不也。然則都無所得也。答曰。不也。是義云何。答曰。無所得故為得。是故得無所得也 此以義合集放光上下之文。而成此理非正文也。大品亦同。三慧品云。須菩提白佛言。世尊。若菩薩修般若波羅蜜。得薩婆若不。佛言不。不修般若得薩婆若不。佛言不。修不修得薩婆若不。佛言不。非修非不修。得薩婆若不。佛言不等。放光二十四略云。須菩提言。世尊。不住最第一要義。成阿惟三佛不。佛言不。乃至云。將無世尊不逮正覺耶。佛言。不也等。答曰已下放光等經。皆是此義。而前四有得。第五無得。皆不許無得而得。始為玄爾。
無所得謂之得者。誰獨不然耶 無得而得正由冥通。冥通之道體遍一切。故楞伽經云。以知眾生本
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 這裡引用了《義引》中的內容。該書第二十九頁說：『眾生的佛性既不是單一的，也不是對立的。』接下來引用了《維摩詰所說經》（凈名經），即該經第一卷菩薩品中的文字，但略有不同。該經說：『諸佛知道一切眾生最終都會寂滅』，也就是涅槃的平等狀態。
這被稱為滅度，存在於沒有滅度的地方。生死就像虛幻的空花，本來就沒有生起，所以已經是滅了。四種顛倒的念頭（四流）如同陽光下的幻影，它們的本性原本就是空，所以已經是度過了。
那麼，眾生不是真正的眾生，誰會是獲得滅度的人呢？涅槃不是真正的涅槃，誰又是能夠獲得涅槃的人呢？』『然則』的意思是，由前面的話引出後面的話。眾生本來就已經滅度了，在滅度之中，能獲得的主體和所獲得的對象都不存在，哪裡還有獲得的表象呢？
所以《放光般若經》說：『菩提是從有中獲得的嗎？』回答說：『不是。』『是從無中獲得的嗎？』回答說：『不是。』『是從亦有亦無中獲得的嗎？』回答說：『不是。』『是從非有非無中獲得的嗎？』回答說：『不是。』『那麼，完全沒有獲得嗎？』回答說：『不是。』『這是什麼意思呢？』回答說：『因為沒有獲得，所以才是獲得。因此，獲得的是無所得。』這裡是將《放光般若經》上下兩部分的文字組合在一起，形成了這個道理，並非原文。 《大品般若經》也是同樣的道理。 《三慧品》中說：『須菩提問佛說：世尊，如果菩薩修習般若波羅蜜，能獲得一切智嗎？』佛說：『不能。』『不修習般若，能獲得一切智嗎？』佛說：『不能。』『修習和不修習，能獲得一切智嗎？』佛說：『不能。』『非修習非不修習，能獲得一切智嗎？』佛說：『不能。』《放光般若經》第二十四品略略地說：『須菩提說：世尊，不住在最第一的要義中，能成就阿耨多羅三藐三菩提嗎？』佛說：『不能。』乃至說：『難道世尊沒有證得正覺嗎？』佛說：『不是。』等等。』回答說以下的內容，《放光般若經》等經典，都是這個意思。前面四種『有得』，第五種『無得』，都不允許沒有獲得而獲得，這才是玄妙的。
把沒有獲得稱為獲得，誰會不這樣認為呢？』沒有獲得而獲得，正是因為與真理暗中相通。暗中相通的道理遍及一切，所以《楞伽經》說：『因為知道眾生的本性……』
【English Translation】 English version: This quotes from 'Yi Yin'. Chapter 29 of that book says: 'The Buddha-nature of sentient beings is neither one nor two.' Next, it quotes the 'Vimalakirti Sutra' (Jing Ming Jing), specifically the text from the Bodhisattva chapter in the first volume, but with slight differences. It says: 'All Buddhas know that all sentient beings will ultimately attain quiescence,' which is the state of equality in Nirvana.
This is called liberation (Nirvana), which exists in the absence of liberation. Birth and death are like illusory flowers in the sky, originally unarisen, so they are already extinguished. The four perverted views (four streams) are like mirages in the sunlight, their nature originally empty, so they are already crossed over.
Then, if sentient beings are not truly sentient beings, who is the one who attains liberation? If Nirvana is not truly Nirvana, who is the one who can attain Nirvana?' 'Then' means that the following words are introduced by the preceding words. Sentient beings are originally already liberated. In liberation, both the subject who attains and the object that is attained do not exist. Where is there the appearance of attainment?
Therefore, the 'Fang Guang Prajna Sutra' says: 'Is Bodhi attained from existence?' The answer is: 'No.' 'Is it attained from non-existence?' The answer is: 'No.' 'Is it attained from both existence and non-existence?' The answer is: 'No.' 'Is it attained from neither existence nor non-existence?' The answer is: 'No.' 'Then, is there absolutely no attainment?' The answer is: 'No.' 'What does this mean?' The answer is: 'Because there is no attainment, therefore there is attainment. Therefore, what is attained is non-attainment.' This combines the upper and lower parts of the 'Fang Guang Prajna Sutra' to form this principle, which is not the original text. The 'Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra' (Da Pin) is the same. The 'Three Wisdoms Chapter' says: 'Subhuti asked the Buddha: 'World Honored One, if a Bodhisattva practices Prajnaparamita, will he attain Sarvajna (all-knowing wisdom)?' The Buddha said: 'No.' 'If he does not practice Prajna, will he attain Sarvajna?' The Buddha said: 'No.' 'If he practices and does not practice, will he attain Sarvajna?' The Buddha said: 'No.' 'If he neither practices nor does not practice, will he attain Sarvajna?' The Buddha said: 'No.' The twenty-fourth chapter of the 'Fang Guang Prajna Sutra' briefly says: 'Subhuti said: 'World Honored One, without abiding in the most supreme essential meaning, can one attain Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi (unexcelled perfect enlightenment)?' The Buddha said: 'No.' And so on, saying: 'Could it be that the World Honored One has not attained perfect enlightenment?' The Buddha said: 'No.' etc.' The content following 'The answer is' and the 'Fang Guang Prajna Sutra' and other scriptures all have this meaning. The first four 'attainments of existence' and the fifth 'non-attainment' do not allow attainment without attainment, which is the profound meaning.
Who would disagree with calling non-attainment attainment?' Attaining without attaining is precisely because of secretly connecting with the truth. The principle of secretly connecting pervades everything, so the 'Lankavatara Sutra' says: 'Because of knowing the nature of sentient beings...'
來而入涅槃。誰獨不得。此則本來得矣。而前云舍陰存陰謂內謂外。如是分別非為正問。
然則玄道在於絕域。故不得以得之。妙智存乎物外。故不知以知之。大象隱於無形。故不見以見之。大音匿於希聲。故不聞以聞之此有四對。皆上句示體。下句辨得。初二對約心境。玄道境也。絕域事之外也。妙智心也。皆非俗故。故云物外。下二句可了。但約境言得。約心言知。后二對約相名以辨。大象非相。不存相以見。然後真見。存相則不見也。大音非聲。不循聲以聞。然後普聞。循聲則不聞也。是故離朱外馳而不得。只為無形。觀音返聞而圓通。良由即性。愿諸達士勿循形聲。
故能囊括終古導(開引)達(示悟)群方(類)亭毒蒼生。疏(遠)而不漏。汪哉洋哉。何莫由之哉 顯涅槃之用也。即出現大用無涯。通前兩科如是次第者。深有所以。謂初示所得之體。次示證得之門。既非得而得從得起用。開示眾生。故最後示業用之大。至哉。斯論三語皆善。記錄登為四聖。今古號為四絕。歷世名德寶而玩之。良有以也。囊括小變易文。彼曰。括囊無咎。謂括結其囊口也。今取包含之義。終古久也。謂涅槃之體既遍既圓。稱體之用亦彌綸包羅。亭毒養育也。疏而下謂妙用無形。義如疏遠。然應機之道未嘗遺漏。
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 來而入涅槃（Nirvana，寂滅）。誰能獨自獲得涅槃？涅槃本來就是具足的。而前面所說的捨棄五陰（skandha，構成個體存在的五種要素，即色、受、想、行、識）而儲存五陰，區分內在和外在，這樣的分別並不是正確的提問。
如此說來，玄妙的道存在於絕遠之境，所以不能用『得』來理解它。精妙的智慧存在於事物之外，所以不能用『知』來理解它。偉大的形象隱藏於無形之中，所以不能用『見』來理解它。宏大的聲音隱藏於無聲之中，所以不能用『聞』來理解它。這有四組對應關係，都是上句揭示本體，下句辨析『得』的含義。前兩組對應關係是關於心和境的。玄道是境，絕域是事物之外。妙智是心，都不是世俗之物，所以說是『物外』。后兩句可以理解。只是從境的角度說『得』，從心的角度說『知』。后兩組對應關係是用形象和名相來辨析。大象不是具體的形象，不執著于形象才能見到，然後才是真見。執著于形象就見不到。大音不是具體的聲音，不追逐聲音才能聽到，然後才能普遍聽到。追逐聲音就聽不到。所以離朱（Lízhu，傳說中視力極好的人）向外追逐卻不能見到，只因爲他執著于有形。觀音（Guānyīn，觀世音菩薩）反過來聽自己的本性而達到圓滿通達，正是因為他迴歸了自性。希望各位通達之士不要執著于形和聲。
所以能夠囊括過去和未來，開導和啓發各種眾生，養育天下百姓。看似疏遠卻不會遺漏。多麼廣闊浩瀚啊！沒有什麼不是由此而來的！這是彰顯涅槃的作用。即是說，涅槃展現出無限的偉大作用。將前面兩科按照這樣的順序排列，是有深刻原因的。意思是先揭示所證得的本體，然後揭示證得的途徑。既然不是通過『得』而『得』，那麼就從『得』而生起作用，開示眾生。所以最後揭示事業作用的偉大。太好了！這篇論述的三句話都很好，記錄下來可以成為四聖，自古以來被稱為四絕。歷代的賢德之士都珍藏玩味它，確實是有原因的。『囊括』這個詞稍微改變了原文。原文說：『括囊無咎』，意思是紮緊口袋。現在取包含的意思。『終古』是長久的意思。意思是涅槃的本體既普遍又圓滿，與本體相應的妙用也瀰漫包羅一切。『亭毒』是養育的意思。『疏而下』是說妙用無形，意義如同疏遠。然而應機施教的道理從未遺漏。
【English Translation】 English version Coming and entering Nirvana (Nirvana, extinction). Who alone cannot attain it? This is originally attained. But the previous statement of abandoning the skandhas (skandha, the five aggregates that constitute individual existence, namely form, feeling, perception, volition, and consciousness) while preserving the skandhas, distinguishing between inner and outer, such distinctions are not proper questions.
Thus, the profound Dao (path, way) lies in the realm beyond, so it cannot be understood through 'attainment'. Subtle wisdom resides beyond things, so it cannot be understood through 'knowing'. The great image is hidden in the formless, so it cannot be seen through 'seeing'. The great sound is concealed in the soundless, so it cannot be heard through 'hearing'. These are four pairs, all with the first sentence revealing the substance, and the second sentence distinguishing the meaning of 'attainment'. The first two pairs are about mind and environment. The profound Dao is the environment, and the realm beyond is outside of things. Subtle wisdom is the mind, and neither is worldly, so it is said to be 'beyond things'. The latter two sentences can be understood. It is just that 'attainment' is spoken of from the perspective of the environment, and 'knowing' is spoken of from the perspective of the mind. The latter two pairs are distinguished by form and name. The great image is not a concrete form; only by not clinging to form can it be seen, and then it is true seeing. Clinging to form prevents seeing. The great sound is not a concrete sound; only by not pursuing sound can it be heard, and then it is universally heard. Pursuing sound prevents hearing. Therefore, Lízhu (Lízhu, a legendary person with excellent eyesight) pursued outward but could not see, simply because he clung to form. Guānyīn (Guānyīn, Avalokiteśvara Bodhisattva) turned back to listen to his own nature and achieved perfect understanding, precisely because he returned to his self-nature. May all enlightened ones not cling to form and sound.
Therefore, it can encompass the past and the future, guide and enlighten all beings, and nurture all living things. Seemingly distant, yet nothing is missed. How vast and boundless! What is there that does not come from it! This is to manifest the function of Nirvana. That is to say, Nirvana manifests infinite great functions. Arranging the previous two sections in such an order has a profound reason. It means first revealing the substance attained, and then revealing the path to attainment. Since it is not 'attained' through 'attainment', then function arises from 'attainment', enlightening all beings. Therefore, the last reveals the greatness of the karmic function. Excellent! The three sentences of this discourse are all good. Recording it can make one a sage, and it has been called the four perfections since ancient times. Virtuous people throughout the ages treasure and savor it, and there is indeed a reason for this. The word 'encompass' slightly changes the original text. The original text says: 'Tightening the bag is without fault', meaning to tighten the mouth of the bag. Now it takes the meaning of inclusion. 'Throughout the ages' means a long time. It means that the substance of Nirvana is both universal and complete, and the wonderful function corresponding to the substance also permeates and encompasses everything. 'Nurturing' means to nourish. 'Distant and below' means that the wonderful function is formless, and the meaning is like distance. However, the principle of teaching according to the occasion has never missed anything.
文借老書。彼云。天網恢恢疏而不漏。汪洋嘆用廣大。
故梵志曰。吾聞佛道厥(其)義弘(大)深。汪洋無涯。靡(無)不成就。靡不度生 即八師經梵志阇旬嘆佛之言。正取化生之用為證。
然則三乘之路開。真偽之途辨。賢聖之道存。無名之致顯矣 九折之義皆三乘也。十演之談皆一乘也。以一乘之實。開三是權。令舍小入大引權歸實。正同法華開方便門示真實相。無名為真有名為偽。賢聖下準表中。諸家談義諦廓然無聖。今論聖人證體起用。賢哲仿之。儒童證涅而進修。空行入空而起行。豈曰無耶。故云存。本演無名以作論故。十演之文以釋有名之執。執既喪亡本致自顯。分文結會。恐入局見。
肇論新疏卷下(終)
【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：
借閱古籍。對方說：『天道之網寬大，雖然稀疏但不會放過任何罪惡。』 汪洋大海用來形容佛法的廣大無邊。
所以梵志（婆羅門）說：『我聽說佛道，它的意義弘大深遠，像汪洋大海一樣沒有邊際，沒有什麼不能成就，沒有什麼不能度化眾生。』 這就是《八師經》中梵志阇旬讚歎佛陀的話，正是以化生之用作為證明。
如此說來，三乘（聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘）的道路得以開顯，真與偽的途徑得以辨明，賢聖的道路得以存在，無名的境界得以顯現了。』 九折的意義都屬於三乘，十演的談論都屬於一乘。以一乘的真實，開顯三乘是方便權巧，使人捨棄小乘而進入大乘，引導權巧歸於真實。正如同《法華經》所說的開啟方便之門，顯示真實之相。無名是真，有名是偽。『賢聖』以下是準表中的內容。各家談論義諦，認為空寂無聖。現在論述聖人證得本體而起妙用，賢哲傚法他們。儒童證得涅槃而繼續修行，空行進入空性而發起行動。難道能說沒有嗎？所以說『存』。原本演說無名是爲了著書立論，十演的文字是爲了解釋對有名的執著。執著既然喪失，本來的境界自然顯現。分段總結，是爲了避免陷入侷限的見解。
《肇論新疏》卷下（終） English version:
Borrowing an old book. The person said, 'The net of heaven is vast, sparse yet letting nothing slip through.' The vast ocean is used to describe the immensity of the Dharma.
Therefore, the Brahmana said, 'I have heard that the Buddha's path, its meaning is vast and profound, like a boundless ocean, there is nothing that cannot be accomplished, nothing that cannot liberate sentient beings.' This is what the Brahmana Jāṭasūrya praised the Buddha in the Eight Masters Sutra, precisely using the function of transformation and birth as proof.
Thus, the paths of the Three Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna, Bodhisattvayāna) are revealed, the paths of truth and falsehood are distinguished, the path of the wise and holy exists, and the state of the nameless is manifested.' The meaning of the ninefold path all belongs to the Three Vehicles, and the discussions of the tenfold evolution all belong to the One Vehicle (Ekayāna). With the reality of the One Vehicle, the revelation of the Three Vehicles is expedient, causing people to abandon the small and enter the great, guiding the expedient to return to the real. It is just like what the Lotus Sutra says about opening the gate of expedient means and revealing the true aspect. The nameless is true, the named is false. 'Wise and holy' below is the content in the standard table. Various schools discuss the ultimate truth (paramārtha-satya), believing that emptiness is without holiness. Now, it is discussed that the holy person realizes the essence and arises with wonderful functions, and the wise emulate them. The Brahmacārin realizes Nirvāṇa and continues to practice, and the one who walks in emptiness enters emptiness and initiates action. Can it be said that there is nothing? Therefore, it is said to 'exist'. Originally, expounding the nameless was for writing treatises, and the text of the tenfold evolution was to explain the attachment to the named. Since attachment is lost, the original state naturally manifests. Dividing the sections and concluding is to avoid falling into limited views.
Zhao Lun Xin Shu (New Commentary on the Zhao Lun), Volume 2 (End)
【English Translation】 Borrowing an old book. The person said, 'The net of heaven is vast, sparse yet letting nothing slip through.' The vast ocean is used to describe the immensity of the Dharma. Therefore, the Brahmana said, 'I have heard that the Buddha's path, its meaning is vast and profound, like a boundless ocean, there is nothing that cannot be accomplished, nothing that cannot liberate sentient beings.' This is what the Brahmana Jāṭasūrya praised the Buddha in the Eight Masters Sutra, precisely using the function of transformation and birth as proof. Thus, the paths of the Three Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna, Bodhisattvayāna) are revealed, the paths of truth and falsehood are distinguished, the path of the wise and holy exists, and the state of the nameless is manifested.' The meaning of the ninefold path all belongs to the Three Vehicles, and the discussions of the tenfold evolution all belong to the One Vehicle (Ekayāna). With the reality of the One Vehicle, the revelation of the Three Vehicles is expedient, causing people to abandon the small and enter the great, guiding the expedient to return to the real. It is just like what the Lotus Sutra says about opening the gate of expedient means and revealing the true aspect. The nameless is true, the named is false. 'Wise and holy' below is the content in the standard table. Various schools discuss the ultimate truth (paramārtha-satya), believing that emptiness is without holiness. Now, it is discussed that the holy person realizes the essence and arises with wonderful functions, and the wise emulate them. The Brahmacārin realizes Nirvāṇa and continues to practice, and the one who walks in emptiness enters emptiness and initiates action. Can it be said that there is nothing? Therefore, it is said to 'exist'. Originally, expounding the nameless was for writing treatises, and the text of the tenfold evolution was to explain the attachment to the named. Since attachment is lost, the original state naturally manifests. Dividing the sections and concluding is to avoid falling into limited views. Zhao Lun Xin Shu (New Commentary on the Zhao Lun), Volume 2 (End)