觀緣品第一
Chapter 1: Contemplating Conditions
歸命一切智！所有世俗、勝義二諦本無所行，若無所行，攝化有情事即當捨離。菩薩為開示故，造此《中論》。然此不同一切外道所說緣生。佛說緣生法，為令覺悟多慢心者生極淨信。於諸論中，此論宗重，謂緣生義，即無滅等句。最勝緣生，顯明開示，是故論初讚歎世尊。如本頌言：
I pay homage to the All-Knowing One! The two truths—worldly and ultimate—are fundamentally without any activity. Where there is no activity, the work of guiding and transforming beings should be relinquished. For the purpose of revealing this, the Bodhisattva composed this *Middle Treatise*. However, this is entirely unlike the theories of conditioned arising taught by other sects. The Buddha taught the Dharma of conditioned arising to help those with great pride awaken and generate pure faith. Among all treatises, this one is held in high regard, as it teaches the meaning of conditioned arising—namely, the phrase "no cessation and so on." To clearly reveal the supreme conditioned arising, the treatise begins with praise for the World-Honored One, as stated in the root verses:
「不滅亦不生， 不斷亦不常等。」
"It does not cease, nor is it born; it is neither cut off, nor is it permanent."
釋曰：滅者，無常性故名滅。發起名生，斷生死故名斷，擇滅涅槃常時性故名常。如有人言：若佛出世、若不出世，法性常住。此緣生者，亦即是常。一者無差別義。如所說離，此即是為緣生之法。何所生邪？謂種種義，如其所說，從因所生、生已有果。來者向此名來。若無來義轉時，此即無去。無去義轉時，即無過去世所行。非今有滅，此即無滅。此法如是，說餘生等亦然。若取著言詮，即為戲論。如其言詮，於如是性執有性者，彼皆息滅，此即名為滅諸戲論、離諸嬈惱性。分別自性空已乃名寂靜。今此如是無滅等十種句義，如前所說十種對治，此中皆止周盡，是論皆說此義，此如是義成，餘一切論中皆同此緣法。今此義中，若此因、若彼緣，如薪生火，而彼所取如是應知。常不斷義，如前句所說發起之義，此所說成。若因中有故，設因壞時後還不離果起，無前後時性故。如澡沐已受食，此非緣生，若言無生，自語相違。不和合對治，此即世俗緣生不和合故。若勝義諦所生，此中止遣。世俗諦識中體性不和合勝義諦體性，此中止遣。何等是世俗？何等是勝義？若勝上所說相續義性，以世俗諦伺察時此不和合，以彼現證非涅槃所得，此所作性不異勝義諦故，亦不止遣。若智所成，即彼世俗諦不異勝義諦，如瓶等色等。而此一類色受等法，決定境界智不許可，彼智無性故，譬如瓶等墮世俗有性，雖無所取，非世俗無。此中所說，世俗所取之義，是自非他，如理應知。世俗者即是世俗所取故，如樹林等非極微許，而有所取道理可得。若方分分別差別分別等性，而彼決定世俗有性，此非道理，以物體遍計有樹林等對礙，而識中有彼樹林等為所表故。然識中物性非無道理，由是樹於彼識而為所緣，如是能表識中得有所表，是故非物體樹於識中有。此如是說故，餘說亦然。於能表所表中，遍計無體亦無所成。何法可成邪？謂如諸佛境界色等決定。此何不成？如彼諸佛境界，此亦然有，非如識中遍計生等此中止遣。識中物體若有性者，此非道理。若彼勝上如來之智，如所說義故名勝義，餘皆世俗，不實性故。此說最上，謂佛所說善文善義。是故頌言：
Explanation:
"Extinction" is the nature of impermanence. "Arise" means being produced. "Cutting off" means ending birth and death. "Discerning cessation" is nirvana's permanent nature, which is eternal. As it is said: Whether a Buddha appears in the world or not, the nature of reality remains constant. This dependently arisen reality is also eternal. "One" means non-differentiation. As explained, detachment refers to this dependently arisen phenomena. What does it produce? It produces various meanings: phenomena arise from causes, and once arisen, they bear results. "Coming" means arriving here. When the meaning of "coming" does not occur, there is no "going." When "no going" occurs, there is no action in the past. Since there is no cessation now, there is no extinction. This principle applies similarly to other conditions like birth, etc. If one clings to verbal expressions, that is conceptual play. When one holds to verbal descriptions and believes in inherent existence, all such notions cease—this is called ending all conceptual play and abandoning all disturbance. Only after discerning the emptiness of inherent nature is there stillness.
Thus, these ten meanings—such as no extinction, etc.—correspond to the ten antidotes mentioned earlier. Here, they are all completely stopped. All teachings explain this meaning, forming the truth of dependent arising. In this context, the cause and the condition—like fire from fuel—should be understood as what they take as their object. The meaning of "constant" and "unbroken" refers to the arising described earlier, which is established here. If the cause contains the effect, when the cause perishes, the effect does not depart from it later because there is no before or after. For example, after bathing, one eats—this is not dependent arising. Saying "no birth" contradicts itself. The antidote of "non-union" refers to conventional dependent arising lacking union. In ultimate truth, what arises is also abandoned here. In conventional consciousness, the nature lacks union with ultimate truth's nature, and that is abandoned here. What is conventional? What is ultimate? The nature of continuity described above does not unite when examined by conventional truth, because direct realization is not attained through nirvana. Yet this effect is not different from ultimate truth, so it is not abandoned. What is produced by wisdom—that conventional truth is not separate from ultimate truth, like forms such as a pot. Yet phenomena of form and feeling do not permit a fixed conceptual object; their nature lacks such a concept, just as a pot exists conventionally. Though nothing is actually grasped, it is not conventionally nonexistent.
Here, the meaning of "conventional object" refers to itself, not others—this should be understood logically. "Conventional" means what is conventionally grasped, like a forest. Even a single atom cannot be grasped as real, yet a basis for grasping exists logically. When analyzing particles or distinctions, insisting on fixed conventional existence is unreasonable. For instance, a forest is conceptually imagined as an obstruction, and consciousness then presents that forest as a symbol. But the physical object in consciousness is not without logic—the forest serves as the object of that consciousness—thus, the symbol arises in the signifying consciousness. Yet the physical forest is not literally present in consciousness. This explanation applies to other cases: In the relationship between sign and signified, imagined constructs have no substance and are not established.
What then is established? It is reality as perceived by Buddhas—forms, etc., are definitive. Why is this not established? It exists just like the Buddhas' reality, not like imagined constructions in consciousness that are rejected here. If physical objects existed in consciousness, that would be illogical. The supreme wisdom of a Tathāgata is called "ultimate truth" because of its meaning; all else is conventional, lacking reality. The highest teaching is the Buddha's words, with excellent meaning and expression. Therefore, the verse says:
「我稽首禮佛， 諸說中第一。」
I bow in reverence to the Buddha, Whose teaching is foremost among all doctrines.
釋曰：若文義二無著智性，唯佛大師而善宣說。何所說邪？謂說無生性。今為證成無生性故，彼無滅等諸差別義亦如是證成，如是建立無生法故。或有人言：所說生者，我知差別之性如是自生。為遮遣彼說，是故頌言：
「諸法不自生。」
釋曰：所言生者，本無今有之別名。自者，我性義。彼如是說，互相損惱。自語相違，不和合對治。或如瓶等，即不見有自生之法，如前瓶等，自體無性故。諸生法無性，生已復生，亦復無性。如是眼等決定和合，若爾即有對治過失。若有如是因，即有如是果。彼果體有生，以因果二法無別異性故。若言自生，此應思擇。又復泥團離瓶，瓶離於因，此中色等當云何有？若離泥團，果因二種無別異性。若泥團離瓶，而此果體即不和合。泥團若壞，瓶有所得，即非果時有因性故。此僧佉人言：譬如色等非果因二法有別異性，色等自體亦如離瓶先無有性。若彼決定實無所成，所說無異如瓶所作。杖輪水等非此所闕，彼等無別異性，因果二無性故。何名無別異？謂不見因自體能作。如是果有所作，亦復不得，無異性故。若無所作，何名因果？決定自體無別異性。若因無作，彼無作時果不和合。有異人言：我知差別，諸法從他性生。為對遣彼說，是故頌言：
「亦不從他生。」
釋曰：他性者，別異義，如他性瓶等不生眼等。由如是故，自緣既不生，他性亦然。若止遣諸法自相，應知有過，此中或有彼不和合。如是所作，非勝義諦中他緣能生內六處等，以他性故，此如瓶等。此中他性瓶等如內六處緣勝義諦中生無性可得，世俗諦中亦然，生無性可得。相違義性無因生性及共生等。若有所得皆他義故。如是所有，中論成就究竟義中離不和合對治等法。若復如是世俗諦中有所得者，決定如前對治相違。世俗緣生有所得故，此亦非所得，如是有所成即和合無性成已見邊二不和合，如是即於諸所成中有共過失。若別異所成，當知自有差別過失，此廣文不書，恐繁且止。非《中論》所說，如前對治。何以故？後對治亦爾，無此中所成和合道理。有異人言：取彼實有泥團，隨有杖等諸作用法共生瓶等。此異意樂，故頌止言：
「共生亦無性。」
釋曰：彼增上所作，言非二法共生，若爾有言說對治過失。有異人言：如所意樂，諸法如是無因而生。為遣彼義，是故頌言：
「亦不無因生。」
釋曰：如他所說，無因生性有所得者，即時處等彼相離性決定有生可得。彼時處性能不相離，此若止遣對治過失。此中或有生性，諸論皆說是有漏義，如是有性各各繫屬。諸性有生，此中皆止。若有所作，即與阿含相違。如佛所說，有四種緣能生諸法。而此四緣，諸經論中皆如是說。何等為四？謂因緣、所緣緣、次第緣、增上緣。如是四緣，無第五緣。諸異宗中有執我者、執極微者。何所以邪？此中若有常因者，彼時處性即能相離，彼一切果乃有同生。現見時處等不相離性，次第生法彼同作因，即不相離因性可得，此無過失。是故同作諸因此中非因，彼說如是生無有性，若有因故決定有果。彼同作諸因決定因性，此本有故。若同作因此相離者，即如前說對治相違，以本和合故，而彼諸因如是建立差別因無性，然彼處等有相離性可同生者，此之分位如士夫等。由如是故非士夫等因本無和合性，士夫等句義亦如自體亦非定有。士夫等本性和合所有因性如種子等，以士夫等本來分位或離所作性，如種子等因有所得或無所得。此復云何？若本來分位離所作性或有所得，即是無常。若不離所作自相，亦即無因。如前已說非諸士夫，如彼種子能生於果。若如是見，此非道理，彼遍計性故。是故前說無第五緣，亦非斷滅。世間所有諸執無因惡因諍論亂意之者，為攝化彼故，如其分位於世俗諦開示宣說諸因緣等，此即非勝義諦。或有問言：自果於緣中為有邪？為無邪？物體第三分別無性。故頌答言：
「如諸法自性， 不在於緣中。」
釋曰：譬如瓶衣，非即有故，亦非異故。如是眼等自性，若自緣、若他緣、若共有，而彼諸緣非即非異。若離自體即無有果，由自力能即有諸緣，此無異性應當思擇。由如是故，因果二法無別異性。何所以邪？若離是因，果不能成。彼能作因，其義亦然。若定有異性，而彼自果於諸緣中即無所生。是故頌言：
「以無自性故， 他性亦復無。」
釋曰：若有此二，即互不相離。若見有他性，如此彼二，非緣時中有果、非果時中有緣。若他性隨生，即因果二法非俱時有，剎那性故。若生不生二所作性二俱無性，若不壞因未來有果，此智所安立乃說他性，然若取著他性非勝義諦有。或有人言：諸經論中皆說他緣能生諸法，云何此說非他性生？若諸緣中他性不生，豈可無自性諸法於緣中住？若爾緣即是非緣。若自性無所有者，果從他緣生即非道理。故頌答言：
「亦非緣生果。」
釋曰：然生法所作有果可成。為總止餘義，是故頌言：
「果不從緣有， 有無果生止；
若說生法時， 無依無所生。」
釋曰：前說果不生無所成者，以能生果者自亦無性。若能生、所生及彼生法定有別異生法可得者，即彼所作說為能生，此中別異生法即無所成。若果離於緣，即所生、生法云何得成？他所繫屬故。或有人言：所作如是從緣所成，非物體自性成故，是故非眼等六處能成緣法。有此意樂，故頌答言：
「果不從緣生， 此果緣中生。」
釋曰：若彼決定別異生法為可有者，彼無生法中間所作若生，而彼眼等決定生法互相離性或如是生，亦何不成？如是說者，彼無自性法，此中有過失。此異宗說，是故有過。若從緣生果，彼果性無依，緣亦無常，相離性中果云何成？如有頌言：
「果若別異解， 無道理可依；
若一法作成， 果體不可立。」
如本頌言：
「非無緣有果， 無緣果亦無；
如是世俗中， 常性不可得。」
釋曰：若或無緣，果即不成；若有果故，彼諸法體即有所得，彼等諸法亦非先有性故，是義當知從緣所生。若離緣生，虛無有果，譬如芽等，何能和合？若言從種生芽，即能生所生二和合故，亦非種子等緣一向能生。以餘法成即能有果，由如是故果非常有。或有人言：從緣有果，此即非常亦非無常，如是性中能生得成。釋者言：如汝所說，此有法故，即此所成。如是決定勝義諦中，非無緣有果、非無果有緣，俱不見故。眼等諸法此中亦然，於其緣性若止遣者，定知有過。是故當知，從緣有果。諸果體生，謂從因緣、次第緣、所緣緣、增上緣生故。以諸緣分別、果體差別如是得成，譬如已成熟果，而諸因體差別分別，是故能作所作此中分別。此如是說決定有果，決定之言即印持義。此中有果其義顯明，世俗諦中果法增勝即有所得，然無分位可著。若果性有著，即他宗義，謂於緣中非實有果。若彼如是從緣生果，互相所攝有果隨轉，彼雖分位各別，然有果生，此說緣生。是故此等諸緣生已，亦各別故。諸未信許言，即是不樂說義。若此果不生，即彼無有緣。何等為緣？謂隨所意樂。是故若無有緣能生於果，此無道理。若或無緣，又復何有緣性可生？
大乘中觀釋論卷第一