觀因果門第九
Chapter 9: Contemplating Cause and Effect
所以有此門來者，上四門求相不可得，次一門明性無蹤。故《無量義經》云「一切諸法自本來今性相空寂，以外相內性空故一切法空。」外人云：若一切法性相空者，可言無因果耶？然世出世因果不可言無，云何言無性相？是故今次明非但無有性相，求此因果亦不可得，故有此門來也。又近從性門來者，前偈上半明無萬物實體、下半明無萬物假體。外云：若假實二體空故一切法空，然因果之理不可無。若爾，終有因果，有因果故不實，即假也。毘曇實有因果體。成實具二義：一者因成，相續、相待論因果，則因實而果假。如四微實，柱是假。若法受名三假，則因果皆假，如細色成麁色是法假、四微成四大是受假、四大成五根已去為名假。又五陰為法假、人為受假、人法皆有名為名假。問：若無因果，與邪見何異？答：有五人立無因果。一立有見人謂，實有果體則不從因生，故成無因果；二外道邪見言無因果；三復二乘言無因果；四大乘人言無因果。外道是邪見撥無因果，故言無因果，此是邪見空。二乘言無因果，望大乘亦是邪見空。故《涅槃》云「若以二乘言，無布施是破戒邪見。」《智度論》云「二乘空是但空，四大乘學方廣人謂無世諦因果。」五諸佛菩薩言無因果者，因果宛然而畢竟空，故名無所得空。所以有三空異，一邪見空、二但空、三真空，今破前二空令入真空，故明因果空也。問：令悟因果空有何利？答：悟因果宛然，即畢竟空故，生如來智；雖畢竟空，因果宛然，生於佛智；因果非因果常爾，而觀行任運純熟為自然智；不從師得，為無師智。既生四智入佛知見，即是因果觀行轉明，遂得成佛為佛果乘。論主今明因果空，為釋成大乘義故也。問：悟因果空但生智慧，云何有功德耶？大乘具以福慧為體，云何但明智慧？答：既得如實悟，還為眾生如實說，即是般若大悲，故福慧具足，名大乘也。問：上來已明因果空竟，今何故復說？答曰：自上八門廣破從因生果義，復有計無因自然有果。此三一病猶未除之，是故今品次破之也。問：若爾，應言破無因有果門，云何言破因果耶？答：論主欲對破破無因有果故。此品雙破從因生果及無因有果：故言觀因果。夫論因果不出斯二：斯二既無則因果便空。又因果難明：上已廣論；今次略辨：故有此門來。又有種種觀門，今作因果觀門以悟入實相，故有此門來也。又上門破因果便備，而更有此門者，是泥洹法寶入有多門故也。問：與《中論．因果品》何異。答：彼品橫闊竪狹。廣破十家因果，並是破從因生果義，故言橫闊；不破無因有果，故言竪狹。此品略破從因生果，復破無因有果，故橫狹竪闊，故異也。門亦三：初長行發起。為二：一者總唱一切法空；「何以故」下，釋二義。別釋一切法空，所以舉二義者，上來已破因果，今復論之，似如煩重，故逆取偈意而生起之。言二義者，一明諸法無自性，此辨果不從因生；二明亦不從餘處來，此正起此門明非因不生果。
This passage opens this gate for the following reason: the preceding four gates sought to show that characteristics cannot be found, and the next gate clarifies that inherent nature leaves no trace. Thus the Sutra of Innumerable Meanings says, "All dharmas, from the very beginning until now, are empty and still in both nature and characteristics. Because outer characteristics and inner nature are empty, all dharmas are empty."
Someone might object: "If the nature and characteristics of all dharmas are empty, can we then say there is no cause and effect? But worldly and transcendent cause and effect cannot be said to be nonexistent—so how can you say there is no nature and no characteristics?"
Therefore, the next section clarifies that not only are nature and characteristics absent, but this cause and effect itself cannot be found either. Thus this gate opens.
Furthermore, approaching from the gate of nature: the first half of the preceding verse clarified the absence of any real substance in all things, and the second half clarified the absence of any provisional substance in all things. An outsider objects: "If both provisional and real substances are empty, and therefore all dharmas are empty, still the principle of cause and effect cannot be absent. If that is so, then ultimately there is cause and effect—and because there is cause and effect, it is not real, which makes it provisional."
The Abhidharma school holds that cause and effect truly exist as substances. The Satyasiddhi school encompasses both meanings: first, causation—when cause and effect are discussed in terms of successive arising and mutual dependence, then the cause is real and the effect is provisional. For example, the four atoms are real, but the pillar is provisional. If we apply the threefold provisionality of names, then both cause and effect are provisional—for instance, subtle forms constituting coarse form is provisionality of dharmas; the four atoms constituting the four great elements is provisionality of reception; the four great elements constituting the five sense faculties and beyond is provisionality of names. Again, the five aggregates are provisionality of dharmas; a person is provisionality of reception; both person and dharmas having names is provisionality of names.
Question: If there is no cause and effect, how is that different from wrong view?
Answer: There are five types of people who posit the absence of cause and effect. First, those who hold the view of existence claim that if an effect truly existed as a substance, it would not arise from causes—thus they end up with no cause and effect. Second, non-Buddhist wrong views assert no cause and effect. Third, the two vehicles (Śrāvakas and Pratyekabuddhas) speak of no cause and effect. Fourth, Mahāyāna practitioners speak of no cause and effect.
Non-Buddhists hold wrong views that deny cause and effect, and so speak of no cause and effect—this is the emptiness of wrong view. The two vehicles speaking of no cause and effect is, from the Mahāyāna perspective, also the emptiness of wrong view. Thus the Nirvana Sutra says, "If, as the two vehicles say, there is no generosity, that is the wrong view of breaking precepts." The Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom says, "The emptiness of the two vehicles is mere emptiness." Fourth, Mahāyāna students of the Vaipulya teachings claim there is no cause and effect in conventional truth. Fifth, the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas speak of no cause and effect in the sense that cause and effect are perfectly apparent yet ultimately empty—therefore it is called the emptiness of non-attainment.
Thus there are three kinds of emptiness: first, the emptiness of wrong view; second, mere emptiness; third, true emptiness. Now, to refute the first two emptinesses and lead into true emptiness, the emptiness of cause and effect is explained.
Question: What benefit comes from realizing the emptiness of cause and effect?
Answer: Realizing that cause and effect, though perfectly apparent, are ultimately empty, one gives rise to the Tathāgata's wisdom. Though ultimately empty, cause and effect are perfectly apparent, and one gives rise to the Buddha's wisdom. Cause and effect are not cause and effect yet are forever thus, and as contemplative practice naturally matures, one gives rise to spontaneously arisen wisdom. Not obtained from a teacher, it is the wisdom without a teacher. Having given rise to these four wisdoms and entered the Buddha's knowledge and vision, one's contemplation of cause and effect becomes ever clearer, and one ultimately attains Buddhahood—this is the Buddha-fruit vehicle. The treatise master now explains the emptiness of cause and effect in order to elucidate the meaning of the Mahāyāna.
Question: Realizing the emptiness of cause and effect only gives rise to wisdom—how does it produce merit? The Mahāyāna takes both merit and wisdom as its essence—why explain only wisdom?
Answer: Having truly realized it, one then truthfully teaches it to sentient beings—this is prajñā and great compassion. Thus merit and wisdom are both complete, and this is called the Mahāyāna.
Question: The emptiness of cause and effect has already been explained above—why is it discussed again now?
Answer: The preceding eight gates extensively refuted the idea that effects arise from causes. But there are still those who assert that effects arise without causes, spontaneously. This single remaining illness has not yet been removed, so the present chapter proceeds to refute it.
Question: If so, it should be called the gate of refuting "no cause, yet effects exist"—why speak of refuting cause and effect?
Answer: The treatise master intends to refute, in direct opposition, the view of no cause yet effects existing. This chapter refutes both effects arising from causes and effects arising without causes—hence it is called "contemplation of cause and effect." Cause and effect never go beyond these two. Since both are absent, cause and effect are empty. Moreover, cause and effect are difficult to illuminate—they were extensively discussed above, and now they are briefly explained. Thus this gate opens. There are also various gateways of contemplation, and now this gateway of contemplating cause and effect is provided for entering into ultimate reality. Thus this gate opens. Furthermore, although the preceding gates already thoroughly refuted cause and effect, this additional gate exists because the treasure of nirvana has many gateways for entry.
Question: How does this differ from the "Chapter on Cause and Effect" in the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā?
Answer: That chapter is broad horizontally but narrow vertically. It extensively refutes ten schools of cause and effect, all of which hold that effects arise from causes—hence "broad horizontally." It does not refute no-cause-yet-effects, hence "narrow vertically." This chapter briefly refutes effects arising from causes and also refutes no-cause-yet-effects—hence narrow horizontally and broad vertically. This is the difference.
The gate also has three parts. First, the prose introduction. This has two: first, a general proclamation that all dharmas are empty; then, from "Why is this?" onward, two meanings are explained. The reason two meanings are presented in specifically explaining that all dharmas are empty is that cause and effect were already refuted above, and discussing them again might seem redundant—so the meaning of the verse is drawn out in advance to generate the discussion. The two meanings are: first, clarifying that all dharmas lack inherent nature—this shows that effects do not arise from causes; second, clarifying that they also do not come from anywhere else—this directly introduces the present gate, showing that effects do not arise without causes.
偈為二：三句正破、一句總結。正破又二：上半明因內無果、次句明因外無果，文易知也。
The verse has two parts: three lines that directly refute, and one line that summarizes. The direct refutation also has two parts: the first half shows that there is no result within the cause, and the next line shows that there is no result outside the cause. The meaning of the text is easy to understand.
長行釋二章即二：前釋三句、次釋第四句。三句又二：前釋上半：「又是果」下，釋第三句。「若果眾緣中無」下，釋第四句也。
The prose commentary has two sections, which are themselves two: first, explaining the three phrases; next, explaining the fourth phrase. The three phrases are also two: first, explaining the first half; from "again, it is the fruit" onward, explaining the third phrase. From "if the fruit is not found among the various conditions" onward, explaining the fourth phrase.
「果空故」下，門中第三結一切法空。
"Because the fruit is empty" — this begins the third point in this section: the conclusion that all dharmas are empty.