掌中論一卷
"Treatise in the Palm"
陳那菩薩造
Treatise by Acarya Dignaga
三藏法師義淨奉 制譯
Tripitaka Master Yijing, by Imperial Command, Translated
論曰：謂於三界但有假名，實無外境，由妄執故。今欲為彼未證真者，決擇諸法自性之門，令無倒解，故造斯論。頌曰：
The treatise states: Within the three realms, there are only provisional names, no external objects truly exist—they arise from deluded attachment. Now, for those who have not yet realized the truth, this work aims to open the door to discerning the true nature of all phenomena, so they may attain correct understanding without error. Hence, this treatise is composed. The verse says:
於繩作蛇解， 見繩知境無，
若了彼分時， 知如蛇解謬。
When you mistake a rope for a snake and then realize your mistake, You come to know that the rope can't actually be a snake. And when you understand the parts that make up the rope, You see that the belief in the snake was only a false idea.
論曰：如於非遠不分明處唯見繩蛇相似之事，未能了彼差別自性，被惑亂故，定執為蛇。後時了彼差別法已，知由妄執誑亂生故，但是錯解無有實事。復於繩處支分差別善觀察時，繩之自體亦不可得。如是知已，所有繩解，猶如蛇覺，唯有妄識。如於繩處有惑亂識，亦於彼分毫釐等處知相假藉、無實可得，是故緣繩及分等心所有相狀但唯妄識。頌曰：
The Treatise says: When seeing something like a rope in the dim distance, mistaking it for a snake before clearly perceiving its true nature, one is deceived by confusion and firmly believes it is a snake. Later, upon recognizing what it truly is, one understands that this was simply a mistaken understanding caused by delusion—an erroneous interpretation with no basis in reality. Then, when carefully examining the rope in detail—its strands and their characteristics—the rope itself as a solid entity cannot be found. Understanding this, the concept of "rope," like the concept of "snake," is merely a product of deluded consciousness. Just as there is a deluded perception concerning the rope, so too, at the level of the smallest particles of those strands, the perceived form is merely an illusory construct with no real substance. Therefore, the mind that grasps the rope and its parts, and the forms it perceives, are nothing but deluded consciousness. The verse states:
諸有假設事， 詳觀自性時，
從他皆假名， 乃至世俗境。
All things designated as real, When examined for their essence, Are merely borrowed names and labels— Even down to ordinary, worldly things.
論曰：如於繩等支分之處別別分析審觀察時，知無實體，唯是妄心。如是應知，一切諸法但是假名，如瓶衣等物藉埿縷等成，乃至言說識所行境未至破壞名為瓶等。言「從他」者，謂從世俗言說而有，非於勝義。頌曰：
The Treatise states: When we carefully examine each part of something—like the threads of a rope—and analyze it piece by piece, we realize that it has no true, solid existence. It is merely a product of deluded perception.
In the same way, we should understand that all phenomena are merely provisional names. For example, a vase depends on clay, and clothing depends on threads. As long as they remain intact and within the realm of conventional speech and recognition, we call them “vase” or “clothing.”
The phrase “arising from others” means that these names arise from worldly conventions of speech, not from ultimate truth.
無分非見故， 至極同非有，
但由惑亂心， 智者不應執。
論曰：若復執云諸有假事至極微位不可分析、復無方分是實有者，此即猶如空花及兔角等，不可見故、無力能生緣彼識故，所執極微定非實有。所以須說不可見因，由彼不能安立極微成實有故。所以者何？由有方分事差別故。猶如現見有瓶衣等物、東西北等，方分別故，斯皆現有支分可得。若言極微是現有者，必有方分，別異性故。是則應許東西北等支分別故。此實極微理不成就，亦非一體。多分成故、見事別故。一實極微定不可得，如是應捨極微之論。是故智者了知三界咸是妄情，欲求妙理不應執實。頌曰：
If one claims that all conditioned things, down to the ultimate particle, are indivisible and without spatial parts, and thus truly exist, this is like a sky flower or a rabbit's horn—invisible and unable to give rise to cognition. Such an ultimate particle cannot truly exist. Why must we cite invisibility? Because the ultimate particle cannot be established as truly real. Why? Because things with spatial parts are distinct in nature. For example, we see jars, clothes, and other objects with parts in the east, west, north, and south, and these parts are observable. If one says the ultimate particle is observable, it must have spatial parts, since it would differ in nature. Therefore, it should be accepted that it has parts like east, west, and so on. The truly real ultimate particle is not established, nor is it a single entity. Since it is composed of multiple parts and observed as distinct, a truly real, single ultimate particle cannot be found. Thus, one should abandon the notion of the ultimate particle. Therefore, the wise understand that the three realms are all delusive perceptions. Seeking profound truth, one should not cling to them as real. The verse says:
妄有非實故， 與所見不同，
由境相虛妄， 能緣亦非有。
Because what appears falsely is not real, It differs from what is actually seen. Since the objects we perceive are illusory, The mind that perceives them also has no true existence.
論曰：若言我亦於彼瓶衣等事許彼自性是不可得，皆是妄識之所分別，然而緣彼相狀亂識是其實有，觀健達婆城及幻人等，其識是有。設有此識，亦非實故，與所見事不相應故。此惑亂識，於所緣境作有性解。彼事自性已明非有，境既是無，能緣妄識亦非實有，云何令彼妄識有耶？然於世間不曾見有無能生種子有所生芽等？由斯汝說幻城等喻道理不成。頌曰：
斯皆是假設， 善覺者能知，
智人斷煩惱， 易若除蛇怖。
These are but assumptions, The awakened one discerns them. The wise cut through afflictions, As easily as dispelling fear of snakes.
論曰：如說三界但有假名，瓶等麁覺既除遣已，知從名言而有其事。善觀察者能了知已，即於繩處蛇怖除遣；復審思惟，了彼差別，於繩等處妄執亦無。如是觀時，一切能生離染之法，易速蠲除煩惱羅網，及諸業果自當斷滅。有別頌曰：
智人觀俗事， 當隨俗所行，
欲求煩惱斷， 要明真勝義。
猶如世人於諸俗事瓶衣等處，以為實有名瓶衣等；智者亦爾，當順世間而興言說，知非實有。若樂觀察煩惱過失求解脫者，宜於如是真勝義中周遍推尋、如理作意，於諸境處及能緣妄識煩惱繫縛不復生長。
掌中論一卷