DonateZen HallLibrary
Skip to main content
  1. Treatise on the Three Natures of Non-Existence (三無性論)
  2. Volume 1 (第一)
  3. Volume 1 (第一)
←&→
Use ← → arrow keys to turn pages

Treatise on the Three Natures of Non-Existence (三無性論)

About 三無性論

Chen · Source text translated by 真諦

15,856 · about 53 min

The Treatise on the Three Natures of Non-being was translated by the Indian monk Paramārtha during the Chen Dynasty of the Southern Dynasties and is an important text of the Yogācāra school. Based on the Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra, this treatise elucidates the doctrine of the three natures of non-being—namely, the non-being of characteristics, the non-being of arising, and the non-being of ultimate meaning—corresponding to the theory of the three natures of being. It demonstrates that all phenomena lack inherent nature and are empty in their dependent origination. This treatise reflects the early dissemination of the Yogācāra school in China and laid the foundation for Chinese Yogācāra studies. It is a key text for studying the integration of Indian and Chinese Buddhist thought and holds an authoritative position in the Buddhist philosophical system, bridging earlier and later developments.


三無性論卷上(出《無相論》)

Treatise on the Three Absence of Natures (the Selflessness), Volume 1<note>Excerpted from the Treatise on No-S

真諦三藏於廣州制旨寺翻譯

True Principle Tripiṭaka Translated at Guangzhou Zhizhi Temple

論曰:立空品中人空已成、未立法空,為顯法空,故說諸法無自性品。釋曰:前說空品,後說無性品,欲何所為?答曰:前說空品為顯人空,但除煩惱障,是別道故。後說無性品為顯法空,通除一切智障及煩惱障,是通道故。復有別用,為除世間三虛妄論:一鬪諍為勝論,如露伽耶鞮迦及僧佉等論;二多聞為勝論,如四韋陀及伊鞮訶婆等論;三正行為勝論,如二乘教等。今說二空除此三論,先說人空,為除前外道兩論;次說法空,為除後一二乘偏執乃至外道邪執論,顯真實正行,依因此行得究竟無比故。復次說人空為破邪法,說法空為立正法。若廣明論用,如十八部,為顯此用故說斯論。此即第一明用分也。

The treatise states: "In the previous section on the nature of emptiness, the emptiness of the self was established, but the emptiness of phenomena was not yet explained. Thus, to clarify the emptiness of phenomena, we now explain the section on the lack of inherent nature."

In response to the question: "What is the purpose of explaining the emptiness of the self first and then the lack of inherent nature?" the answer is:

The first section on emptiness is meant to reveal the emptiness of the self, which only removes the hindrance of afflictions—this is a path suited to those of lesser capacity. The later section on lack of inherent nature is meant to reveal the emptiness of phenomena, which removes both the hindrance to omniscience and the hindrance of afflictions—this is a universal path.

There is also another purpose: to counteract three false worldly theories: 1. **The theory of victory through disputation**—such as the schools of Lokāyata and Sāṃkhya. 2. **The theory of victory through extensive learning**—such as the four Vedas and the Itihāsas. 3. **The theory of victory through correct conduct**—such as the teachings of the Two Vehicles (Hīnayāna).

Now, by explaining the two kinds of emptiness, these three theories are eliminated. First, the emptiness of the self removes the first two erroneous theories (those of disputation and extensive learning). Then, the emptiness of phenomena removes the third—the narrow attachments of the Two Vehicles as well as the distorted views of non-Buddhist schools. It reveals the true and correct conduct, and by following this conduct, one attains the supreme and incomparable result.

Furthermore, the emptiness of the self is taught to dismantle wrong views, while the emptiness of phenomena is taught to establish right views. For a fuller explanation of the treatise’s purpose, refer to the eighteen principal meanings. It is to clarify this purpose that the treatise is set forth.

This concludes the first part: the explanation of the function of the treatise.

論曰:外問於何法中立此無性?應先安立是法。若說如是則無相理有所相應,實虛兩境即便可見。
答曰:一切諸法不出三性,一分別性、二依他性、三真實性。分別性者,謂名言所顯諸法自性,即似塵識分。依他性者,謂依因依緣顯法自性,即亂識分依因內根、緣內塵起故。真實性者,謂法如如。法者即是分別、依他兩性。如如者即是兩性無所有,分別性以無體相故無所有、依他性以無生故無所有,此二無所有皆無變異故言如如,故呼此如如為真實性。此即第二相應分,即是立名。次約此三性說三無性,由三無性應知是一無性理。約分別者,由相無性說名無性。何以故?如所顯現是相實無,是故分別性以無相為性。約依他性者,由生無性說名無性。何以故?此生由緣力成、不由自成,緣力即是分別性。分別性體既無,以無緣力故生不得立,是故依他性以無生為性。約真實性者,由真實無性故說無性。何以故?此理是真實故。一切諸法由此理故同一無性,是故真實性以無性為性。

All dharmas are encompassed within three natures: the nature of discrimination, the nature of dependence, and the nature of reality.

The nature of discrimination refers to the self-nature of all dharmas as revealed through names and words. It is like the aspect of consciousness that seems to perceive objects.

The nature of dependence refers to the self-nature of dharmas as they arise relying on causes and conditions. It is the confused, discriminating consciousness that arises depending on internal sense faculties and external sense objects.

The nature of reality refers to Thusness (suchness). "Dharmas" here means the natures of discrimination and dependence. "Thusness" means that these two natures are utterly non-existent: the nature of discrimination is non-existent because it has no substance; the nature of dependence is non-existent because it has no arising. Since both of these non-existences are unchanging, they are called "Thusness." Therefore, this Thusness is called the nature of reality.

This is the second corresponding aspect—the establishment of names.

Next, in relation to these three natures, we speak of three non-natures. Through these three non-natures, one should understand they point to one principle of non-nature.

In relation to the nature of discrimination, it is called non-nature because of the non-nature of characteristics. Why? Because what appears as a characteristic is actually non-existent. Thus, the nature of discrimination has non-existence as its nature.

In relation to the nature of dependence, it is called non-nature because of the non-nature of arising. Why? Because this arising is achieved through the power of conditions, not through itself. The power of conditions is precisely the nature of discrimination. Since the substance of the nature of discrimination is already non-existent, there is no power of conditions, and therefore arising cannot be established. Thus, the nature of dependence has non-arising as its nature.

In relation to the nature of reality, it is called non-nature because of the non-nature of ultimate reality. Why? Because this principle is the ultimate reality. All dharmas, through this principle, share the same non-nature. Therefore, the nature of reality has non-nature as its nature.

釋曰:約真實性,由真實無性故說無性者,此真實性更無別法,還即前兩性之無是真實性,真實是無相無生故。一切有為法不出此分別、依他兩性,此二性既真實無相無生,由此理故一切諸法同一無性。此一無性,真實是無、真實是有。真實無,此分別、依他二有;真實有,此分別、依他二無,故不可說有亦不可說無。不可說有如五塵、不可說無如兎角,即是非有性非無性,故名無性性。亦以無性為性名無性性,即是非安立諦。若是三性並是安立,前兩性是安立世諦,體實是無安立為有故;真實性即是安立真諦,對遣二有安立二無名為真諦。還尋此性離有離無,故非安立。三無性皆非安立也。此即第三相分,明三種體相也。
論曰:此三種性如是無性已說其相,今須說成立道理。分別性者無有體相。何以故?此性非五藏所攝故。若法是有,不出五藏。五藏者:一相、二名、三分別、四如如、五無分別智。一相者,謂諸法品類為名句味所依止。名者,即是諸法品類中名句味也。分別者,謂三界心及心法。如如者,謂法空所顯聖智境界。無分別智者,由此智故一切聖人能通達如如。此五法中前三是世諦,後二是真如。一切諸法不出此五。若分別性體是有法,則應為此五攝,以不攝故,故知體無也。
外曰:此法若無體相,云何分別?答曰:但有名無義。何以故?如世間於義中立名,凡夫執名分別義性,謂名即義性。此為顛倒,是故但有分別無有實體。外曰:云何知此分別是虛妄執?答曰:此名及義皆是客故。所以然者,名於義中是客,非義類故;義於名中亦客;非名類故。外曰:云何得知兩互為客?答曰:由三義故此理可知。一者先於名智不生。如世所立名,若此名即是義體性者,未聞名時則不應得義。既見未得名時先已得義。又若名即是義,得義之時即應得名。無此義故,故知是客。二者一義有多名故。若名即是義性,或有一物有多種名,隨多名故應有多體。若隨多名即有多體,則相違法一處得立。此義證量所違,無此義故,故知是客。三者名不定故。若名即是義性,名既不定,義體亦應不定。何以故?或此物名目於彼物,故知名則不定物。不如此故,知但是客。復次汝言:此名在於義中。在義云何?為在有義、為在無義?若在有義,前三難還成。若在無義,則名義俱客,此定成立。外曰:義及名非分別所作。何以故?實名能顯實義故,如實有燈照實瓶等,是故名義俱非分別。答曰:是義不然。何以故?照了不平等故。若如汝言:義實有者用名顯義,如燈照色。是義不成。何以故?要先得義後立名故,未得義時不得立名。既由先取義後方立名,取尚不能了義,何況其名而能了耶。以燈照物,義則不爾。要因於燈故能了物,無先了物然後須燈,是故照義不平等也。
釋曰:言取尚不能了義者,如識先得義,次取青黃或是非等,從取後方立名。若取能了義,則不應未取之時識已得義,是故不因於取能得了義,名在取後豈能了也。又若名能了義,餘人未識名時,則不應聞名不得其義。譬如由燈照色,此人因燈能顯了色,而餘人因此不能見色。無有此義,決定因照能顯色故。由名顯義則不如是,是故照義不平等也。
論曰:外曰:若汝謂由名分別義,實無所分別義,是故名中無義、義中無名,二俱客者。是義不然。何以故?若人執名異於義、義異於名,此人既無顛倒,則於義中應無僻執,不應聞說好惡生憂喜心,名義不相關故。聞好惡名即生憂喜心故,知名義相應不得是客。當知客義是汝顛倒。
答曰:是義不然。何以故?由久時數習顛倒故有此僻執,不關名義相應。若人已執名異義異,由名於義亦未免僻執。何以故?由長時數習名言熏習故。必由此法門生分別心起虛妄僻執,如凡夫正見人亦知此身但唯色等行聚,由其數習我執堅固故,於自他相續中不免人我僻執。如此名義分別是法僻執,即是顛倒,增益無物故。如人我僻執故,知名義僻執是法顛倒。既是顛倒,云何生此顛倒而非繫縛?是故由僻執熏習本識成於種子,能生起依他性為未來果。此僻執即是分別性,能為未來依他因也。又因此未來依他性果,更生未來法執顛倒,即是由依他性為因,能生未來分別性為果。如此更互相因故,生死恒起相續不斷。此即第四成立三性分。說分別性成立義已。
別有六種差別,次說此性品類差別。然此分別性差別有六種:一者自性分別,謂分別色等諸陰體相,但以證量所取。五識但能直取五塵,乃至意識直能取法,不於一中種種分別,故名自性分別,直取體性故。二者差別分別,謂有色可見不可見等。色則可見,香味五塵非眼所見。如是隨於一自性中,更種種分別不同,故稱差別分別也。三者覺知分別,謂見前法即識其名字、能為他說。既自識名字,復能令他得識,故稱覺知分別。四者隨眠分別,謂見前物不識名字、不能宣說,故稱隨眠分別。五者加行分別,又有五種:一隨愛分別、二憎憶分別、三和合分別、四遠離分別、五隨捨分別。由此五分別生三毒煩惱,故稱加行。合此五就前四,並是約義分別。六名分別,又有二種:一有名字、二無名字。有名字,謂此物實如是,或色乃至及識,或有為無為、有常無常、善惡無記,如是等執皆有名字分別。無名字者,謂此何物為?此云何?何所以?云何如此?此四句分別,初一覓體性;次一求因,謂何因緣故有如此;三覓體差別;四求因差別。此四皆是無名字分別。此依名分別義自性五種。又有五種所分別自性:一依名分別義自性、二依義分別名自性、三依名分別名自性、四依義分別義自性、五依名義分別名義自性。一依名分別義自性者,謂此類是色,由色體性而得成就,乃至此類是受想行識等,由識體性而得成就也。
釋曰:謂此人先未得義、前得色名,聞說色相如此,有形礙、可捉持、有壞滅如此等相,名之為色。此人後見色體品類相貌,如昔所聞,知其是色,即是由名字能分別色體性。乃至識陰亦爾,先得其名未見其體,後時得體如昔所聞,即知是受乃至識也。
論曰:二依義分別名自性者,謂此類可名為色、彼類不可名色,乃至此類可名為識、彼類不可名識,由先得義然後分別立其名也。三依名分別名自性者,謂此色名,如人雖得其名、未識此名品類,更復思量學其訓釋,是名依名分別名,乃至識名求其所訓品類亦爾。四依義分別義自性者,謂未得色名,因不定名分別色類。如人未識物名但見物體,而分別此體異於餘物,不知定是何物。不得其定名故,但名依義分別義。亦如小兒所見,未識名字,及無分別識位所得境界,如五識等,並緣義不緣名也。五依名義分別名義者,謂此類以色為體,此色即是名。如人先已識名識義,後重分別前所識名義,謂此為色體,此即色名,乃至此類以識為體,此識即是名。如是等皆名依名義分別名義也。此五分別即是廣前六中最初自性分別,前略明故但云自性分別,後廣明故分別五種自性也。如是前六後五,皆名分別性品類差別。已說分別性品類差別竟,次說分別性功用。此分別性能分別前六後五,今為顯此六五分別性功用差別。有八種分別,能作三種事類。三事類者:一戲論類、二我見我慢類、三欲等惑類。八種分別者:一自性分別,謂色等類色即色,陰等即餘四陰類。即是前依名分別義等五種分別自性及前六中最初自性,如是等皆名自性分別也。二差別分別,謂於色等類可見不可見、礙無礙如是等無量差別分別,皆依止自性分別,是名差別分別也。三聚中執一分別,謂於色等陰,執我眾生命者受者如是等名,共期所立,執此而起分別。又於多法聚中執聚為因,謂屋軍車衣食飲等。如是等名,皆是共期所立,執此而起分別,是名聚中執一分別也。此兩即是內外分別,前執有人、後執有法。
釋曰:共期者,世流布所立名字,皆共期契所作,欲令同作一解也。
論曰:四我分別,謂此類是有流有取,長時我執數依串習,從此僻執串習、緣身見所依止類、起虛妄分別,是名我分別也。
釋曰:此類是有流有取者,類即是阿梨耶識,為諸惑本。有流即是無明。有取即是貪愛。過去煩惱十使以滅,不可分別為諸惑名,但總稱無明,能障智明故。此無明能為諸惑因,能流轉生死,故稱有流。如數人說,流注生死故、心漏連注故、非人所持故,故說有流。取者即是有流家果,因謝過去故名有流,果來在現相續中故名為取。即是現相續中隨眠貪欲種子也。若諸煩惱並在現相續中說流說取者,流即四流,取即四取。如此別說此流取等,皆不離本識,故言此類是有流取也。長時我執數依串習者,通說無始來有此流取等惑,故說長時也。我執有三種:一隨眠、二上心、三習氣。言數者,即明隨眠我執數數依止本識。言串者,即上心我執數數串起。言習者,即明習氣我執數數而起。隨眠、上心是內煩惱,得見諦道此惑便滅。習氣為久習所成,非正煩惱,故得羅漢時此猶未滅,得法如如方能稍遣。此三我執皆依本識也,緣身見所依止類、起虛妄分別者,明本識有二義,是三種身見所依止:一能作種子生於身見、二作身見所緣境界令起虛妄我執。正談緣此本識作境界起,故稱我分別也。
論曰:五我所分別,謂此類是有流取,長時我所執數依串習,從此僻執串習、緣我所見所依止類、起虛妄分別,是名我所分別也。所執境界義不異第四,但能分別有我執及我所執為異耳。六愛分別,謂緣可愛淨類虛妄分別,名愛分別也。七憎憶分別,謂緣可憎不淨類虛妄分別,名憎憶分別也。八非愛非憎分別,謂緣非可愛憎類,翻前二分別,名非愛非憎分別也。若略說分別,唯有兩種:一分別依止、二分別境界。於八種分別中,自性及差別并辨聚中一執,此三分別能作戲論分別依止及作戲論分別境界。何以故?依止此類名想言所起分別、名想言所熏習分別,名戲論分別。於三類中由緣三名故,數數起行種種相貌。如是分別名為戲論,以三類為依止、三名為境界、戲論為分別體。依止境界即是分別性,戲論分別即依他性。
釋曰:八分別中,前三分別名為戲論。分別此三各各即為依止、即為境界、即為戲論體。何以故?於三分別中各有能所故。能即是戲論體所中則有二,謂類及名。類即是三種義類,名即是三類種種名。是故以義為依止、以名為境界、緣此名字為法門,取於義類故。正以所取為依止、所緣為境界,故云依止此類、緣名想言所起分別。云想言者,謂心想此名、言說此名,故云想言。此則分別為想言所依止。今此中立想言者,並是名字,欲顯名字有麁細,名則為細、想則小麁、言為最麁,是故用此三名目三分別。初自性分別,直明色等法體,此義為細,故立名名。次差別分別,明體差別,則小為麁,故立想名。後聚中一執分別,謂瓶屋等,此最為麁,故從言名也。名想言所熏習分別名戲論分別者,由緣此三名為境界起於分別,所分別即有熏習能分別義,能分別即是戲論分別。於三類中緣三名數數起行種種相貌者,明依止三類、緣三名為法門,而數數生起種種相貌。分別依止境界戲論,體唯是一,有三義用。
論曰:次我及我所:此二分別能作身見及諸見本:能作我慢及諸慢本。
釋曰:此兩分別,例前亦應明,即為依止境界及分別體。前既已明,例自可解故不須辨,故但明能生後我見及作諸見本。由執有我故生諸見,我所執能作我慢本及諸慢。
論曰:後愛憎對二,此三分別能生欲瞋及無明等。
釋曰:此三分別即是三毒,是故能生一切三毒也。
論曰:如是八種分別,能作三種事用品類。前三即作戲論類,次兩即作我見我慢類,後三即作欲等惑類。初六種分別顯攝法義,一切分別不出此六。凡攝三義:自性及差別此二是分別依止,覺知、隨眠、加行此三是分別體,後一名字是分別境界。是故六種攝法皆盡。覺知、隨眠通三性,加行唯不善。是上心惑離有五種:隨愛生貪、隨憎起瞋、隨捨生無明,此三是煩惱體;和合、遠離是煩惱用,由貪故和合、由瞋故遠離。由無明故通成此兩,不立別能。貪是引境故和合,瞋是棄境故遠離,由有無明故有引棄,是故通成二用。次依名分別義等五種分別,為顯分別依止及境界、差別依止及境界。但分別性攝後八種分別,為顯三種障事,謂自性、差別、聚中一執,此三分別能生心煩惱,為一切智障。我及我所,此兩分別能生肉煩惱,為解脫障。可愛、可憎及翻前二,此三分別能生皮煩惱,為禪定障。此三煩惱即三事類,心煩惱即戲論事類、肉煩惱即我慢事類、皮煩惱即是欲等惑事類。此三事類是依他性。若略說分別,不出三種:一分別依止、二分別體、三分別境界。若說分別體,謂三界心及心法。依止及境界更無別體,以似塵義類為依止,以似塵義類之名為境界耳。次辨相惑、麁重惑。若分別性起能為二惑繫縛眾生,一者相惑、二者麁重惑。相惑即分別性,麁重惑即依他性。此二惑所以得立者,於依他性中執為分別性故得立。
釋曰:呼分別性為相惑者,相謂相貌,說相貌為惑,能為惑緣故說為惑。但依他性是正惑,而說輕重者,分別性但是惑緣,說惑故說為輕;依他性正是惑體,故說麁重。由相惑故能障無分別智,不合無分別境分別相貌故。由麁重惑正感後生得諸苦等。兩必相由而有,故言二惑繫縛眾生也。
論曰:若人不得不見此二性,從此二惑即得解脫。言不得者,謂不得分別性。此性永無有體,故無所得。言不見者,謂不見依他性。依他性雖有體,以心不緣相故,此性亦不有,故云不見。此性所以不得不見,由二種道:一見道、二除道。由見道故分別即無,故言不得。由除道故依他性即滅,故言不見。
釋曰:昔由未見理故起邪分別,非有謂有,呼曰邪見。由此邪見能障治道。今既見理,即達昔所見非有,故云分別性即無;由此正道能除昔邪見,故云依他性即滅。昔分別、依他更無兩體,今見除二道亦一而無兩也。
論曰:是名分別性功用成立分別性有四義畢。此次明成立依他性。此性體相已如前說,今為成就此性故說成立道理。此性不但以言說為體。何以故?言說必有所依故。若不依亂識品類名言得立,無有是處。若不爾,所依品類既無有,所說名言則不得立。若爾則無二性,無二性故則無惑品,無惑品故則有二過:一不由功用自然解脫、二則生死涅槃不可顯現。由無此二過失故,是故應知決有依他性。
釋曰:此中言名言決有所依止,以依他性為所依,由有依他性故得立名言,若無此性則無能立。是故此中明所依品類異前,前則以分別性品類為名言所依也。
論曰:此性體相云何?答曰:唯是相類及麁重惑類。問曰:此類云何說為依他也?答曰:互為因緣共相成故。所以然者,由緣相故麁重得成,由緣麁重相類得成故,說此兩類名依他性。何以故?無異體故並名依他性,約義終不同也。
問曰:若爾,云何此性由無生故名無生性?答曰:所以得名無生者,由他力故生。他既無體,自無能生。以無因無體,是故無生也。
問曰:此性云何不知為有為無耶?答曰:此性如所分別,不如是有故不可言有,不一向是無亦不可說無。不如是有故非有,不一向無故非無。若解意者,則一切種名並皆可說,亦可說有、亦可說無、亦可說亦有亦無、亦可說非有非無,皆不相違。
問曰:此言有者,為是物有、為假名有?答曰:具有兩義故可說有:不如是有,名假名有;非一向無,故名物有,謂有物也。
問曰:既說為有,為是俗有、為是真有?答曰:皆是俗有。何以故?非無分別境界故。
問曰:俗諦何相?答曰:俗諦有三相,謂我說、法說、事說。我說者,謂我、眾生、壽者、行者、人天、男女等。法說者,謂色、受、想、行、識等。事說者,謂見聞生滅等。此等名為俗,俗成立此依他性類。前分別性亦有四種:一成立有、二成立體相、三成立事用、四成立差別。廣明體相已如前說,具明事用後別更說。今此中在先明有依他性,為欲顯有此性,故舉惑品等事用,所以事用在體相前略舉也。
論曰:此性體云何?下更略說體相。
問:俗諦何相?下明此性差別也。七種如如甚多義,生如如中明分別依他用、因果生滅無前後義。真諦者謂七種如如:一生、二相、三識、四依止、五邪行、六清淨、七正行。
一生如如者,謂有為法無前無後。有為法者但兩性攝,謂分別、依他。此法無前無後,凡有三種:一約二性辨無前後,若說依他性在前,無有分別性依他不成;若說分別性在前,無有依他性分別性不成。是故二性遞互相須,無有前後,以相生故。分別性既無,依他性不有,二俱無故即是如如也。二約因果辨無前後,若因定在前,更無所因則不成因。若無因緣自然有因者,因則無量。若果定在前,既無有因則不成果。若無因緣自然有果,果則無窮。是故因果無定,前後轉轉相望,望前則為果、望後則為因,故生死無初。如是因果體即分別、依他,分別既無、依他不有,即是如如也。三約生滅辨無前後,若生在前、滅在後者,有二過失:一則未有老死已便得生、二則未捨此生便得彼生。若爾,又有兩失:一者生則無用,此既已生,何用彼生?未捨報故。二者生則無窮,已生復生轉轉而討,豈得有窮也。若爾,復有兩失:一者但生不滅則應是常、二者若有多生是多眾生。若爾則因果無有相發生義,又若恒生則無涅槃也。若滅在前、生在後者,既未有生,滅何所滅?又應先涅槃、後受生死,先有滅故。是則解脫已還受繫縛。是故生滅無有前後,亦不離分別、依他,故曰如如也。
二相如如者,謂人法二空。此二空相所以名如如,有三義:一離戲論。戲論者,謂執真與俗或一或異等。四謗通稱戲論。若執真與俗定一,則不勞修道並皆解脫,悉見真故皆是聖人。又若真俗定是一,則真不能遣俗義。既不能遣俗,俗惑不除無解脫義,但唯凡夫無有聖人也。若執真定異俗,則依俗不能通真,真即不可會,無方便故。是故二空離此戲論,故名如如。二是無分別智境界。此智無顛倒,無有俗諦堪為境者,是故此智所會即是如如。三是真實性。若違此性則成生死,若順此性則得涅槃。此性為一切法真性,故名如如。是故二名相如如。非言相空,乃以相空為相也。
三識如如者,謂一切諸行但唯是識。此識二義,故稱如如:一攝無倒、二無變異。攝無倒者,謂十二入等一切諸法但唯是識,離亂識外無別餘法故。一切諸法皆為識攝,此義決定,故稱攝無倒,無倒故如如。無倒如如,未是無相如如也。無變異者,明此亂識即是分別、依他似塵識所顯,由分別性永無故依他性亦不有,此二無所有即是阿摩羅識,唯有此識獨無變異故稱如如。前稱如如,但遣十二入。小乘所辨一切諸法唯十二入,非是顛倒。今大乘義破諸入並皆是無,唯是亂識所作故。十二入則為顛倒,唯一亂識則非顛倒,故稱如如。此識體猶變異,次以分別、依他遣此亂識,唯阿摩羅識是無顛倒、是無變異,是真如如也。前唯識義中亦應作此識說,先以唯一亂識遣於外境,次阿摩羅識遣於亂識,故究竟唯一淨識也。
四依止如如者,所謂苦諦。苦諦有三:一苦類、二苦諦、三苦聖諦。苦類者,謂五取陰,依止此五說名眾生。苦所依止不出此五,故稱苦類。苦諦者,謂不顛倒,明此苦類決定違逆聖意,此義是實,故名苦諦。聖人緣此,決生捨離、不起染著。苦聖諦者,謂苦一味。明此苦諦以無體性故空,空故無相,無相故無願,無一法可願求者。此約通相辨三解脫體唯是一,一切諸法不離於此,故稱一味,聖是正義。此一味無倒無變,故名聖諦。初苦類即是俗諦;次苦諦即真諦,以無顛倒是安立真諦,後一即是第一義諦,無倒無變異是非安立諦。後去三諦亦爾。
五邪行如如者,所謂集諦。例苦亦三:一集類,謂六種貪愛依六塵所起,能令生死相續不出此類。二集諦者,謂不顛倒知。此六貪愛決定能令諸有相續,真實無倒名為集諦。三集聖諦者,謂集一味不異於前四諦,同以三解脫門為一味故。
六清淨如如者,所謂滅諦。亦有三種:一滅類者,謂四沙門果,即是見思兩惑滅盡不生是其類也。二滅諦者,謂不顛倒。此滅類決定寂靜,是其諦義。三滅聖諦者,謂滅一味亦不異前。
七正行如如者,所謂道諦。亦有三種:一道類者,謂八聖道分是其類也。二道諦者,謂不顛倒。此八決定能出離集,是其諦義。三道聖諦者,謂道一味亦不異前也。
復次依止如如者,所謂苦諦。苦諦者,所謂行苦,以無常故。無常有三義:一無有無常,謂苦分別性永無所有,此無所有是無常義。真實有此無所有,名真如如。若以前無後無為無常者,此乃俗諦,不顛倒名為如如,非真如如也。二生滅無常,謂苦依他性。此依他性既非實有亦非實無,異真實性,故非實有;異分別性,故非實無。非實有故是滅,非實無故是生。如此生滅是無常義,而生非實生、滅非實滅是真如如。三離不離無常,謂苦真實性。此性道前未離垢、道後則離垢,約位不定故說無常,體不變異名為如如。
復次邪行如如者,所謂集諦。集諦者,謂真似兩集。真集者,謂諸煩惱能令五陰相續是有。似集者,謂諸業能得諸道差別。集有三種:一熏習集,謂分別性類惑能熏起集。何以故?由分別類惑能作集家因。二發起集,謂煩惱及業。何以故?由此生起成故。
釋曰:此發起集即是依他性,依他性體即是煩惱及業,由此性能生起未來五陰自體。又為分別性,所生即是自生,生他故名發起集也。
論曰:三不相離集,謂集如如。此如如體未離障說名集。何以故?此如如是集家性故、集所障故,說集如如。此三即三無性,故名如如。
復次清淨如如者,所謂滅諦。亦有三義:一體相無生滅,謂分別類惑本無體相,故名為滅。二能執無生滅,謂但亂識類惑由因由緣,本無有生,故名為滅。三垢淨二滅,謂本來清淨、無垢清淨。約分別性說本來無垢,約依他性說無垢清淨。何以故?此性有體則能染污,由道除垢故得清淨。本來清淨即是道前道中,無垢清淨即是道後。此二清淨亦名二種涅槃,前即非擇滅,自性本有,非智慧所得。後即擇滅,修道所得。約前故說本有、約後故說始有,始顯名始有,故名清淨如如。
復次正行如如者,所謂道諦。亦有三義:一知道,謂約分別性,此性無體,但應須知無有可滅,故名知道。二除道,約依他性,此性有體,是故應知是煩惱類,所以須滅,故名除道。三證得道,約真實性,此性是二空故,應知除滅故應得。故名正行如如也。
此七種真諦體,即三無性,故通名如如。於此七中,前三種是非安立諦。何以故?此三但有別名、無別體故。生如如所以在先者,為可除滅故。相如如所以居次者,同是生家滅故。識如如所以在後者,是滅家方便故。後四如如是安立諦。何以故?此四約用立名,用有四故;不約體立名,體唯一味故。依止所以最先者,應知見故。二義應知:一所知境多,二但應須知無更餘義。所知境多者,於苦諦中有無常苦空無我四種義故。所餘集等三諦,但有四名、無四義異。何以故?集諦但因義為實,滅諦但以寂靜為實,道諦但以出離為實。所餘有緣等九義,皆是假名。二但應須知無更餘義者,苦是業果,報非煩惱,故不可除;非勝德,故不須證;非正行,故不須修。但為厭離,所以須知,是故更無斷證修等義也。若知此,即能滅除諸惑,是故邪行在第二。由惑滅故證得清淨,故清淨在第三。由證得清淨具足,故正行圓滿。何以故?道有三用:一見真實義、二除惡法、三能至寂靜。此三若具足則道用圓滿,故說正行在第四也。此七如如即是真實性。
三無性論卷上

第二

CBETA Code: T1617

© AI 帮你读佛经 - 如是我闻

This document is for personal learning only. Do not use for commercial purposes.

Visit rushiwowen.co

Copyright: Original texts from CBETA
AI translation for reference only — not authoritative, not a statement of final truth. Awakening of the Dharma requires personal practice.