---
title: "大乘廣百論釋論 · 4 破見品"
description: "《大乘廣百論釋論》是唐代高僧玄奘翻譯的重要佛教論典，原為印度論師護法對聖天《廣百論》的註釋。玄奘於貞觀年間西行求法，將此論帶回中土並譯為漢文，成為唯識學派的核心文獻之一。該論以破斥外道、闡揚中觀空性思想為主旨，通過邏輯論證揭示諸法無自性的真理，並融合瑜伽行派的唯識理論。在佛教史上，它既是中觀與唯識學派的重要橋樑，也被視為大乘佛教辯證哲學的典範，對漢傳佛教義學發展影響深遠。"
url: "https://rushiwowen.co/en/r/cmcy8s4w901q8l704wxkk03wh"
---

## 大乘廣百論釋論卷第六

> The Extensive Hundred Verses Treatise of the Mahayana, Volume Six

聖天菩薩本　護法菩薩釋

> Saintly Deva Bodhisattva's Original Text, Dharma-Protecting Bodhisattva's Commentary

三藏法師玄奘奉詔譯

> Tripitaka Master Xuanzang, by Imperial Decree

### 破見品第四

> Chapter 4: Refuting Wrong Views

復次若如所言，諸法性相世俗事有、勝義理空，如來於中智見無礙，言音辯了巧悟他心，如何世間猶為種種妄見所魅諍論紛紜？由能聞者有過失故。何者名為聞者過失？謂貪己見、不求勝解、於善惡說不能了知。若無如是三種過失，是則名為聞正法器。為顯此義，故說頌曰：

> Moreover, if as stated, the nature and characteristics of all phenomena are conventionally existent and ultimately empty of inherent reality, and the Tathagata possesses unobstructed wisdom and insight into this, with eloquent speech and skillful understanding of others' minds, then why do people in the world still become deluded by various false views and engage in endless disputes? It is because the listeners have faults. What are these faults of the listener? They are: attachment to one's own views, not seeking deeper understanding, and inability to discern between skillful and unskillful teachings. If one is free from these three faults, then they are a suitable vessel for receiving the true Dharma. To illustrate this meaning, a verse is spoken:

「稟和希勝慧， 是法器應知；異此有師資， 無因獲勝利。」

> Those who are gentle and aspire to supreme wisdom are vessels of the Dharma, this you should know. Without such qualities in both teacher and disciple, there can be no attainment of true victory.

論曰：要具三德名為法器：一者稟性柔和無有偏黨，恒自審察不貪己見；二者常希勝解求法無厭，不守己分而生喜足；三者為性聰慧，於善惡言能正了知德失差別。若無如是所說三德，雖有師資終無勝利。言勝利者，所謂師資開悟證得如其次第。如彼六師諸外道等，雖聞正法而無所證，非佛於彼無愍濟心，亦非聖教不中正理，以於世間所應度者，聞佛聖教皆已度訖。為顯此義，故次頌曰：

> It is said that to be a true vessel of the Dharma, one must possess three essential qualities: First, a gentle and impartial nature, constantly reflecting on oneself without clinging to personal views. Second, a constant aspiration for profound understanding, never tiring in seeking the Dharma and never content with one's current state. Third, innate wisdom that clearly discerns the difference between virtue and fault in words and actions. Without these three qualities, even if one has a teacher and the conditions for learning, there will be no true benefit. The benefit referred to here is the awakening and realization that arises in both teacher and student, each according to their capacity. Just as the six teachers and other non-Buddhist masters, though they heard the true Dharma, did not attain realization—not because the Buddha lacked compassion for them, nor because the teachings were not in accord with truth, but because all those in the world who were ready to be liberated had already been liberated through hearing the Buddha's teachings. To clarify this meaning, the following verse is given:

「說有及有因， 淨與淨方便；世間自不了， 過豈在牟尼？」

> "To speak of existence and its causes, Purity and the means to purity— If the world fails to understand, Is the fault truly with the Sage?"

論曰：諸佛如來無礙智見，觀利他事不過四種，謂所捨、證及此二因。體義皆真名言非謬，即是四諦聖教所攝。佛雖廣說而彼不知，過在世間，非牟尼失。以諸外道覺慧庸微，及闕正修故不能解。如彼烈日放千光明，盲者不見於日無咎。

> The Treatise states: The unobstructed wisdom and insight of all Buddhas perceive that benefiting others ultimately revolves around four fundamental matters: what is to be abandoned, what is to be realized, and the causes leading to these two. Their essence and meaning are all true, and the terms used to describe them are not mistaken; these are precisely the Four Noble Truths encompassed by the sacred teachings. Although the Buddha expounded them extensively, beings fail to comprehend—this fault lies with the world, not with the Sage. It is because external practitioners possess mediocre and shallow wisdom, and lack proper cultivation, that they cannot understand. Just as when the blazing sun radiates a thousand beams of light, a blind person cannot see it—the fault is not with the sun.

復次彼諸外道定為無明放逸睡眠纏覆心識，於自所許不能信依。所以者何？故次頌曰：

> Furthermore, those outsiders are certainly ensnared by ignorance, carelessness, and drowsiness, which cloud their minds and consciousness, preventing them from truly trusting and relying on what they themselves profess. Why is this so? As the following verse states:

「捨諸有涅槃， 邪宗所共許；真空破一切， 如何彼不欣？」

> "Renouncing all existence to attain Nirvana is a view shared by misguided schools. The true emptiness that shatters all attachments—why would they not rejoice in that?"

論曰：諸外道宗皆言棄捨我所有事，唯我獨存遠離󰊋纏，蕭然解脫無為惔怕名曰涅槃，離相真空絕諸妄境，亦無分別執有等心。觀此能除一切心境，正歸無上大般涅槃，不違汝等所求解脫，如何憎背而不生欣？我等涅槃唯除我所，空亦破我，知何所欣？汝涅槃中若有我者，必不離所，何成涅槃？我如前破，不應重執，故當欣此離我真空。有則可除，空無能遣。執有起過觀空即除，空有二途德失懸隔，云何汝等黨有誹空？可愍邪徒癡狂無智，不能信受有益真空，常好邪求無益妄有，而於正教反生嫌嫉。如彼惡子婬亂迷心，耽媔色聲猖蹶無禮，於母慈訓不知敬從，自任凶頑反生怨害。

> The treatise states: Various non-Buddhist schools all claim that by discarding what belongs to the self, only the self remains, far removed from entanglements—serene, liberated, inactive, and tranquil—this they call Nirvana. It is a state of emptiness, detached from characteristics, severed from all delusional realms, and free from discriminating thoughts that cling to existence and the like. Observing this, they believe it can eliminate all mental states and truly lead to the supreme Great Nirvana. They argue: "This does not contradict the liberation you seek. Why do you resent and turn away from it instead of rejoicing? Our Nirvana merely discards what belongs to the self, while emptiness also negates the self. What is there to rejoice in? If your Nirvana still contains a self, it cannot be separated from what belongs to it—how can that be called Nirvana? As I refuted earlier, one should not cling to such views again. Therefore, one should rejoice in this emptiness that is free from the self. Existence can be eliminated, but emptiness cannot be expelled. Clinging to existence gives rise to faults, while contemplating emptiness removes them. The paths of emptiness and existence are vastly different in virtue and fault. Why do you, siding with existence, slander emptiness? Pitiful are these misguided followers, deluded and lacking wisdom. They cannot believe in and accept the beneficial emptiness, but instead constantly pursue the useless delusion of existence. Toward the true teaching, they harbor resentment and jealousy. Like a wicked child, driven by lust and confusion, indulging in sensual pleasures, unruly and disrespectful, who neither respects nor follows the mother's compassionate guidance, but instead, in his own willful stubbornness, turns to resentment and harm."

復次若離真空，畢竟無別捨證方便。故次頌曰：

> Furthermore, if one departs from the true emptiness, there is ultimately no other means to abandon or realize it. Therefore, the next verse says:

「不知捨證因， 無由能捨證；是故牟尼說， 清涼餘定無。」

> "Without knowing the cause of attainment, One cannot abandon that attainment; Therefore, the Sage has declared, Beyond the cool peace, no other state exists."

論曰：彼諸外道雖復發心求證涅槃及捨生死，由不善知捨證方便，於所捨證終不能成。憎背真空耽著妄有，故於方便名不善知，除真空觀，無捨生死及證涅槃別方便故。諸有貪求外道見者，終不能得出世清涼。言清涼者，則是一切苦及苦因究竟寂靜。唯有空觀是證得因，除此更無別方便故。如是空觀佛法中有，一切外道邪論所無，故牟尼說四沙門果，我法中有，餘法定無。以諸外道執著己見，誹空觀故不證涅槃。云何應知我等所執定非捨證正方便耶？前已具說，執常句義立實有時，皆有過失，後當廣破。執根境等，故知汝執非正方便。又諸外道於涅槃處，實不能離我所見等，而謂彼處有自內我，解脫我所名為涅槃。所以者何？我與我所畢竟無有相離義故。汝不可言苦樂等法，於涅槃處遠離於我，汝自立為我所有故。如汝所執我之自體，亦不可言我之自體非我所有，同喻無因。勿汝所執我無自體，便似空華，有違宗過。是故汝等外道所執，不能究竟捨離生死，亦不能證究竟涅槃，由此應知非正方便。

> It is stated: Although those non-Buddhist practitioners also aspire to attain Nirvana and abandon the cycle of life and death, they fail to understand the proper methods for renunciation and realization. Consequently, they cannot achieve what they seek to abandon or attain. They reject the truth of emptiness and cling to delusory existence, which is why their methods are called improper. Apart from the contemplation of emptiness, there is no other means to abandon life and death or to realize Nirvana. Those who are attached to non-Buddhist views will never attain the cool liberation beyond the world. "Cool liberation" refers to the ultimate stillness of all suffering and its causes. Only the contemplation of emptiness serves as the cause for realization; there is no other method. Such contemplation of emptiness exists within the Buddha's teachings but is absent in all non-Buddhist, erroneous doctrines. Therefore, the Buddha declared that the four fruits of the monastic path exist in his teachings and are definitely absent elsewhere. Because non-Buddhists cling to their own views and slander the contemplation of emptiness, they cannot attain Nirvana. How can it be known that our attachments are not the proper means for renunciation and realization? It has been thoroughly explained earlier that when one asserts the permanence of entities or establishes the reality of existence, there are always faults. Later, these will be extensively refuted. Since they cling to sense faculties, objects, and so forth, it is clear that your attachments are not the proper means. Moreover, non-Buddhists cannot truly relinquish views of self and what belongs to self regarding Nirvana. They claim that in that state, there exists an inherent self, and liberation from what belongs to self is called Nirvana. Why is this? Because self and what belongs to self are ultimately inseparable. You cannot say that feelings like pleasure and pain are separate from the self in Nirvana, since you yourself assert them as belonging to the self. As for the essence of the self that you cling to, it cannot be said that the essence of the self does not belong to the self, for there is no basis for such an analogy. Do not let your attachment to a self without essence become like an illusory flower, contradicting your own tenets. Therefore, the attachments of you non-Buddhists cannot ultimately abandon the cycle of life and death, nor can they realize ultimate Nirvana. From this, it should be understood that these are not the proper means.

復次諸外道等製造書論，雖彼所詮少分有實，謂說施等是牽引因，能招善趣及餘勝樂；又說殺等是牽引因，能招惡趣及餘劇苦。然彼書論前後相違，亦復許為殺生等業，又能引發諸惡見趣，亦從如是見趣所生。如有盲人遇遊正道，或時迷失復履邪途。外道書論亦復如是，有實有虛不可依信。若爾如來三藏聖教，或有所說難可信解，是則一切內外經書無可信者，成太過失。所以者何？佛經中說種種神變不可思議，又說甚深真實義理，諸有情類不能測量。復說如來三業作用，聲聞乘等所不能知，謂無功用普於十方無量無邊極遠世界，隨諸有情一一根性無量無數品類差別，如其所樂，能於一時現妙色身饒益無盡。雖斷一切尋伺分別，而能為彼無量有情宣說無邊甚深廣大真實美妙無盡法音，於一念頃能除有情無量無邊心行穢垢。其心雖無實生實滅，亦無一切能緣所緣，而一念頃普於一切所知境界現見周盡，於現見時遠離一切能見所見分別思惟。雖斷一切隨眠纏縛，而於三有現受死生，雖久離欲而生欲界，現處居家迫迮牢獄，貯畜種種財穀珍奇，養育妻兒親眷僮僕。如是等事皆難信知，故我於此深懷猶豫。事若唯有誠可生疑，然事亦空。故次頌曰：

> Furthermore, various non-Buddhist schools compose their own scriptures and treatises. Although a small part of what they explain contains truth—such as teaching that generosity and similar acts are causes that lead to favorable rebirths and other superior pleasures, and that killing and similar acts are causes that lead to unfavorable rebirths and other intense sufferings—their scriptures and treatises are often contradictory. They also endorse actions like killing, and they give rise to harmful views, which in turn arise from such views. It is like a blind person who occasionally walks on the right path but often strays onto wrong paths. The scriptures of non-Buddhist schools are similar—partly true, partly false, and thus unreliable. If that is so, then even the sacred teachings of the Tathāgata’s Three Baskets might contain statements that are difficult to believe, leading to the extreme fault that no scripture, whether internal or external, can be trusted. Why? The Buddha’s sutras speak of various miraculous powers that are inconceivable; they explain profound and true principles that sentient beings cannot fathom. They also describe the activities of the Tathāgata’s body, speech, and mind, which even śrāvakas and others cannot fully understand. For example, without effort, the Buddha simultaneously manifests wonderful forms throughout the ten directions, across immeasurable, boundless, and extremely distant worlds, in accordance with the countless differences in the faculties and dispositions of each sentient being, bringing benefit without end. Although free from all discursive thought and conceptualization, he can proclaim to immeasurable sentient beings the profound, vast, true, beautiful, and inexhaustible Dharma. In a single instant, he can remove the boundless defilements from the minds of sentient beings. Although his mind has no real arising or ceasing, and no subject-object duality, in a single instant he fully perceives all objects of knowledge, and while perceiving, he is free from all conceptual thinking of seer and seen. Although he has severed all latent tendencies and fetters, he appears to undergo birth and death within the three realms. Although he has long transcended desire, he manifests in the desire realm, living in a household, confined as if in a prison, storing various treasures, grains, and jewels, and supporting wives, children, relatives, and servants. Such matters are indeed difficult to believe and understand, so I am deeply doubtful about them. If these things were real, doubt would be justified. However, these phenomena are also empty. Therefore, the following verse states:

「若於佛所說， 深事以生疑；可依無相空， 而生決定信。」

> "If you have doubts about the profound teachings spoken by the Buddha, you can rely on the empty nature of all phenomena and give rise to unwavering faith."

論曰：此頌意言，如來為怖外道群鹿，大師子吼示現真空。如是真空其義決定，分明理教所共成立。諸有智者用為定量，銳難精思皆不能越。隨順空理無倒勤修，眾善莊嚴成無上果。於此應生決定信解，唯空是實餘竝非真。但是如來隨物機欲，善權方便顯示宣揚。又佛所言雖有無量，略唯二種謂空不空。若於不空有所疑者，可依空理比度應知。諸法皆空云何可見？由識言境有義不成。諸法體相略有二種，謂識所識及言所言。一境同時有多識起，隨見差別境相不同，此識不應隨外境起。由一境體多相不成，故知所識決定非有，言是假立唯詮共相，一切共相皆非實有，多法成故，如軍林等。又諸共相皆依別法，所依別法其數無邊，諸近見者不能普見。既不見別，不應見總，如二性等依二等物，不見所依必不能見。如是共相既非所見，如何依彼建立能詮？是故共相但假施設，非為實有可為言詮。又諸共相若實有者，一一法上全有分有俱不得成。一一法上若全有者，應如別法共相不成。一一法上若分有者，應成多分非一共相。又實等上無別有一，實等總性慧所緣故，如非實等。總性即是諸法共相，是故共相非有實體，但諸世間假共施設。如是諸法，或識所識、或言所言，二種推徵俱非實有，除此二境更無別法，故應信解諸法皆空。由此契經有如是說，諸法實性無示無對，皆同一相，所謂無相。諸法性相非言所行，言不能詮，故名無示。非心心法所行境故，非緣有對之所能對，故名無對。非超二種所行相外別有餘相，故名無相。空相無二，故名一相。不為妄執貪等毒箭損害真見，所證真空分明可了，故名為相。又真空理離有無等一切法相，故名無相。無相無二，故說為一。即以如是無相為相，故名為相，非別有相。

> The treatise states: The meaning of this verse is that the Tathāgata, to frighten the herds of deer-like non-Buddhists, roars like a lion king, revealing the true emptiness. This true emptiness is of definitive meaning, clearly established through both reasoning and scripture. All wise ones take it as a definitive measure; even sharp and subtle contemplations cannot surpass it. By diligently practicing in accord with the principle of emptiness without error, adorning oneself with all virtues, one attains the supreme fruit. Regarding this, one should generate definitive faith and understanding: only emptiness is real; all else is not true. It is merely that the Tathāgata, in accordance with the capacities and desires of beings, skillfully employs expedient means to reveal and proclaim it. Furthermore, although the Buddha's words are immeasurable, in brief they are of two kinds: empty and non-empty. If one has doubts about the non-empty, one should know by inference based on the principle of emptiness. How can it be seen that all phenomena are empty? Because the objects of consciousness and speech are not established as having intrinsic nature. The essential characteristics of phenomena are, in brief, of two kinds: those cognized by consciousness and those expressed by speech. When a single object is present, multiple consciousnesses arise, each perceiving a different aspect; thus, these consciousnesses do not arise based on an external object. Since a single object cannot have multiple aspects, we know that what is cognized is definitively non-existent. Speech is conventionally established, merely designating general characteristics. All general characteristics are not truly existent, because they are formed by many phenomena, like an army or a forest. Furthermore, all general characteristics depend on particular phenomena. The particular phenomena they depend on are limitless; those with limited perception cannot perceive them all. Since one does not perceive the particulars, one should not perceive the general. Just as the characteristics of duality depend on dual things—if one does not perceive the basis, one cannot perceive what depends on it—so too, since general characteristics are not perceived, how can verbal designations be established based on them? Therefore, general characteristics are merely provisional designations, not truly existent entities that can be verbally designated. Moreover, if general characteristics were truly existent, then whether they exist wholly or partially in each individual phenomenon is untenable. If they exist wholly in each phenomenon, they would be like the particular phenomena themselves, and the general characteristic would not be established. If they exist partially in each phenomenon, they would become multiple parts, not a single general characteristic. Furthermore, on truly existent things, there is no separate, single universal nature that is an object of wisdom, just as there is no non-existent universal nature. The universal nature is the general characteristic of phenomena; therefore, general characteristics have no substantial entity but are merely conventionally designated by the world. Thus, phenomena—whether cognized by consciousness or expressed by speech—when examined through these two approaches, are both found to be non-existent. Apart from these two objects, there is no other phenomenon. Therefore, one should believe and understand that all phenomena are empty. Accordingly, the sūtras state: "The true nature of all phenomena is unindicated, non-confrontational, and of a single characteristic, namely, the characteristic of no characteristic." The nature and characteristics of phenomena are not within the domain of speech; speech cannot express them, hence they are called "unindicated." They are not objects of mind and mental factors; they are not confronted by conditioned, confrontational consciousness, hence they are called "non-confrontational." There is no characteristic beyond these two domains of perception, hence it is called "no characteristic." The characteristic of emptiness is non-dual, hence it is called "a single characteristic." It is not harmed by the poisonous arrows of false views, attachment, and so forth; the true emptiness realized is clearly evident, hence it is called "a characteristic." Furthermore, the principle of true emptiness is free from all characteristics of existence, non-existence, and so forth, hence it is called "no characteristic." Having no characteristic and being non-dual, it is said to be one. It is precisely this characteristic of no characteristic that is called "a characteristic"; there is no other characteristic apart from this.

復次彼諸外道作如是言：諸佛所說略有二種謂空不空。空言若實，餘說應虛。若佛所言一分是實，則類餘分亦非虛者。我等所言亦應如是，云何總撥言不可信？汝等外道於現事中有謬失故不可依信。所以者何？故次頌曰：

> Furthermore, those non-Buddhist teachers argue: "The teachings of the Buddhas can be broadly divided into two categories: those that speak of emptiness and those that do not. If the teachings on emptiness are true, then the other teachings must be false. If some of the Buddha's words are true, and by analogy the rest are not false, then our teachings should also be treated the same way. Why do you dismiss them entirely as unreliable?" You non-Buddhist teachers are mistaken about present realities and therefore cannot be trusted. Why is that? As the following verse states:

「觀現尚有妄， 知後定為虛。」

> "If even the present is seen as delusion, Know that the future is certainly empty."

論曰：彼諸外道邪覺亂心，淺近事中尚有顛倒，況於後世深遠難知因果理中而無謬失？是故所言不可依信。於何淺近我有倒耶？謂勝論者計同異等是現量境，諸數論者計苦樂等是現量境。如是等事其數無邊，皆有顛倒。所以者何？如勝論執同異性等是現量境，其理不成。牛馬等性分別意識，於色等法假施設有，越諸根境非現量得，遍諸所依無差別故，如和合體。彼計第六和合句義，其體是一遍諸所依，越諸根境非現量得。同異等性其義亦爾，云何執為現量境界？又彼論說有實句義，是現量境。理亦不然。所以者何？瓶衣等物，分別意識於色等法假施設有，云何執為現量境界？然彼論說瓶衣等物因德業實同異合故，為眼所見及身所觸，故是根境現量所知。此必不然。先明因德所引實智非現量攝，謂因青等煖等諸德所引實智，定非見觸現量所攝，非業同異實所引生依隨餘相合所生故，如因香味所引實智。因業引生實智亦爾，如其所應，比量遮破。謂因諸業所引實智，亦非見觸現量所攝，非同異性實所引生依隨餘相合所生故，如因香味所引實智。因實引生所有實智，如見壺等知是牛等。既破壺等諸實句義非所見觸，即已破彼所引實智，以壺等智必因德業方乃得生，此前已破，是故亦非現量所攝。因同異性所引實智，亦非見觸現量所攝，依隨餘相合所生故，如非實等所有諸智謂非實智，於德業等言此非實依隨餘相合所生故，定非見觸現量所攝。餘智亦爾。由是應知，一切句義假合生智，皆非真實緣彼現量，謂緣實智非是真實，緣實現量假合生故，如德等智。如是乃至緣和合智亦非真實，緣彼現量假合生故，如實等智。故不應執六句義中有現量境，是故勝論於其現世淺近事中亦有顛倒。

> The treatise states: Those various non-Buddhist paths, with their erroneous perceptions and confused minds, already hold mistaken views even regarding superficial and immediate matters—how could they possibly avoid error when it comes to the profound and difficult-to-know principles of cause and effect in future lives? Therefore, their claims cannot be relied upon or trusted. In what superficial matters do they hold mistaken views? For example, the Vaiśeṣika school asserts that universals and particulars are objects of direct perception, while the Sāṃkhya school asserts that pleasure and pain are objects of direct perception. Such instances are countless, and all involve mistaken views. Why is this? Take the Vaiśeṣika assertion that universals and particulars are objects of direct perception—this reasoning does not hold. The nature of "cow" or "horse" is conceptually constructed by the discriminating mind based on forms and other phenomena; it transcends the senses and their objects and cannot be grasped by direct perception. Since it pervades all its bases without distinction, it is like the aggregate of "combination." They posit a sixth category of "combination," which is singular, pervades all its bases, transcends the senses and their objects, and is not apprehended by direct perception. The nature of universals and particulars is likewise—how can they be claimed as objects of direct perception? Moreover, their theory states that the category of "substance" is an object of direct perception. This too is unreasonable. Why? Objects like pots and cloth are conceptually constructed by the discriminating mind based on forms and other phenomena—how can they be claimed as objects of direct perception? Yet their theory argues that pots, cloth, and other things are seen by the eye and touched by the body due to the combination of qualities, actions, substances, universals, and particulars, and are thus known by direct perception through the senses. This is certainly not the case. First, it is shown that the cognition of substance derived from qualities is not included in direct perception. The cognition of substance derived from qualities such as blue or warmth is definitely not included in the direct perception of sight or touch, because it arises dependently through association with other aspects, not from substance itself as combined with universals and particulars—just like the cognition of substance derived from smell or taste. The same applies to the cognition of substance derived from actions, as can be refuted by inference accordingly. That is, the cognition of substance derived from actions is also not included in the direct perception of sight or touch, because it arises dependently through association with other aspects, not from substance itself as combined with universals and particulars—just like the cognition of substance derived from smell or taste. As for the cognition of substance derived from substance itself, such as recognizing a pot as belonging to a cow, etc.—since it has already been refuted that pots and other substances are not seen or touched, the cognition derived from them is also refuted. This is because cognition of pots, etc., necessarily arises from qualities and actions, which has already been refuted earlier. Therefore, it too is not included in direct perception. The cognition of substance derived from universals and particulars is also not included in the direct perception of sight or touch, because it arises dependently through association with other aspects—just like cognitions of non-substances, such as the cognition "this is not a substance" regarding qualities, actions, etc., which arises dependently through association with other aspects and is definitely not included in the direct perception of sight or touch. The same applies to other cognitions. Thus, it should be understood that all cognitions arising from the conceptual combination of categories are not true direct perceptions of those objects. For example, the cognition of substance is not a true direct perception of substance, because it arises from conceptual combination—just like cognitions of qualities, etc. Similarly, even the cognition of combination is not a true direct perception of combination, because it arises from conceptual combination—just like cognitions of substance, etc. Therefore, one should not assert that among the six categories there are objects of direct perception. Hence, even in superficial matters of the present world, the Vaiśeṣika school holds mistaken views.

復次彼數論者執色等法三德合成，是實非假，現量所得。理亦不然，多法成故，如軍林等。色等應假，云何言實？又樂等三其性別故，如未變位不應成一。又色等法若是實有，應如樂等非三合成。又樂等三其相各異，云何和合共成一相？不可合時轉為一相，與未合時體無別故。又樂等三性既各異，相不應同，汝執性相定是一故，性應如相同、相應如性異。又樂等別，色等是總，汝執總別既定是一，總應如別是三非一，別應如總是一非三，云何別三成於總一？又轉變時，樂等三德若不和合共成一相，如未轉時其相差別，不應現見是一色等。若三和合共成一相，應失樂等三種別相，不可說言樂等三德各有二相：一總二別。所以者何？總相若一，不應即三；總相若三，不應見一。若言樂等一一皆有樂等三相共相和雜，難可了知故見一者，此亦不然。各有三相還應見三，如何見一？云何可知樂等有異？又若一一皆有三相，何須和合共成色等？即應一一能成色等根境差別為我受用。又此三德各有三相，互有差別，如何色等其相是一？又若樂等一一皆能成色等法，一一法體皆三合成，是則諸法若性若相應無差別，同以三德三相成故。若爾所有大等因果，唯量諸大諸根差別，一切不成世間現見情與非情淨穢等物。現比等量亦無差別，違諸世間現所見故，成大過失。如是等類，外道邪師所執雖多，皆不應理，誰能撓攪糞穢聚為？我佛法中多諸法將，已摧彼敵，故不煩詞。如是外道於淺近處，白日夷途尚致顛蹶，況於深遠嶮絕稠林巨夜重昏而無謬失？誰有識者信彼邪言為止歸邪？故復頌曰：

> Furthermore, the proponents of the Samkhya school assert that phenomena such as form are composed of the three qualities (gunas) and are real, not illusory, being directly perceived. This reasoning is also flawed, for they are formed from multiple elements, like an army or a forest. Since form and other phenomena are composite, how can they be called real? Moreover, the three qualities—pleasure, pain, and indifference—have distinct natures; just as they are not unified in their unmanifest state, they should not become one. If form and other phenomena were truly real, they should be like the three qualities and not composed of them. Additionally, the three qualities have distinct characteristics; how could they combine to form a single appearance? It is impossible for them to transform into one appearance when combined, as their essence remains unchanged from when they were separate. Since the natures of the three qualities are distinct, their appearances should not be identical. You claim that nature and appearance are definitely one, so the nature should be like the appearance—identical—and the appearance should be like the nature—distinct. Moreover, the three qualities are particular, while form is general. If you insist that the general and the particular are definitely one, then the general should be like the particular—three, not one—and the particular should be like the general—one, not three. How could three particulars combine to form one general? Furthermore, during transformation, if the three qualities do not combine to form a single appearance, their distinct characteristics should remain as before, and we should not perceive a unified form. If they do combine to form a single appearance, they should lose their individual characteristics. It cannot be said that each of the three qualities has two aspects: one general and one particular. Why? If the general aspect is one, it should not be three; if it is three, we should not perceive it as one. If you argue that each of the three qualities contains all three, mixed together and difficult to discern, hence appearing as one, this is also unreasonable. If each has three aspects, we should still perceive three, not one. How then could we know they are distinct? Moreover, if each possesses all three aspects, why would they need to combine to form form and other phenomena? Each should be capable of creating the distinctions of senses and objects for the self to experience. Also, if each of the three qualities has three aspects, with mutual distinctions, how could form and other phenomena have a single appearance? If each of the three qualities can independently form phenomena, and each phenomenon is composed of all three, then all things, in both nature and appearance, would be indistinguishable, as they would all be formed by the three qualities with three aspects. In that case, all distinctions—such as cause and effect, magnitude, the elements, the senses, and the differences between sentient and non-sentient beings, purity and impurity—would not exist. Direct perception and inference would also lack distinction, contradicting what is observed in the world and leading to great error. Although the misguided teachers of non-Buddhist schools hold many such views, none are reasonable. Who would stir up a pile of filth? In our Buddhist teachings, there are many skilled Dharma generals who have already defeated such adversaries, so there is no need for further elaboration. These non-Buddhists stumble even on clear, level paths in broad daylight; how could they avoid error in the deep, perilous thickets of profound truths, shrouded in the heavy darkness of ignorance? Who with discernment would trust their false words or take refuge in their errors? Hence, it is further stated in verse:

「諸依彼法行， 被誑終無已。」

> Those who rely on that path of practice will be deceived endlessly.

論曰：若諸有情隨彼外道昧見倒執所說法行，彼隨惡友邪教化力，妄見熏習所任持故，誹毀如來證所起法，獲大罪業其量無邊。由是因緣墮諸惡趣，受大憂苦無有出期。故有智者勿類愚夫隨惡友行而自欺誑，應隨諸佛真實無罪速證出離聖教修行。

> The Treatise states: If sentient beings follow the teachings and practices of those external paths, which are based on deluded views and inverted attachments, they fall under the influence of harmful companions and erroneous instruction. Sustained by the force of habitual wrong views, they slander the Dharma realized by the Tathagata, thereby incurring immense, boundless negative karma. Because of this cause and condition, they fall into the miserable realms, enduring great suffering and sorrow with no foreseeable end. Therefore, those with wisdom should not imitate the foolish who follow harmful companions and deceive themselves. Instead, they should follow the true, blameless teachings of the Buddhas, which swiftly lead to liberation, and practice accordingly.

復次如上所言，佛經中說種種神變不可思議，又說甚深真實義理。諸有情類不能測量，乃至廣說。如是等事難信知者，誠如所言。諸佛功德所說義理，皆甚深故難可信知，汝等愚夫薄福少智，唯求自利不願濟他，未飲大悲甘露法味，豈能信解如是法門？若有慧光破無明闇，深心悲愍一切有情，求佛菩提具廣大福，乃能信解如是法門。謂諸如來昔無量劫，悲慧種姓熏發其心，為拔有情生死大苦，為求無上正等菩提，於諸佛所恭敬供養，聽聞正法繫念思惟，修集無邊法隨法行，謂施戒忍懃定慧等，種種難行微妙勝行，殷重無間修習圓滿，證得無上正等菩提，獲不思議自在神力。本願所引妙用無窮，於此何緣而不信解？現見世間機關等事，先勢所引任運動搖。如是如來殊勝神變，本願所引任運施為。又如世間習幻術者若極成滿，處多人眾妙用難思。何況如來久修勝定增上滿足，神通作用而可測量？是故汝等於諸如來不思議事應生信解，於佛圓德自在神通當至心求，勿懷放逸。有聲聞等於佛無邊不思議力，自知絕分悲號傷歎聲振三千。汝等云何誹謗不信？

> Furthermore, as mentioned earlier, the Buddhist scriptures speak of various miraculous transformations beyond comprehension and profound truths of ultimate reality. Sentient beings are unable to fathom them, as extensively described. Such matters are indeed difficult to believe and understand, just as you say. The merits and teachings of the Buddhas are all exceedingly profound, making them hard to trust and comprehend. You ordinary beings, with little merit and wisdom, seek only your own benefit and have no desire to aid others. Having not tasted the nectar of great compassion, how could you believe and understand such teachings? Only those whose wisdom light dispels the darkness of ignorance, who deeply pity all sentient beings, who seek the enlightenment of a Buddha and possess vast merit, can believe and understand such teachings. The Tathāgatas, in countless past eons, were inspired by the seeds of compassion and wisdom. To rescue sentient beings from the great suffering of birth and death and to attain supreme, perfect enlightenment, they reverently made offerings at the feet of the Buddhas, listened to the true Dharma, contemplated it with focused minds, and cultivated boundless practices in accordance with the Dharma—such as generosity, morality, patience, diligence, concentration, and wisdom. They diligently and continuously perfected these difficult and sublime practices, thereby attaining supreme, perfect enlightenment and acquiring inconceivable, sovereign spiritual powers. Guided by their original vows, their wondrous functions are limitless. Why then should you not believe and understand? Observe the mechanical devices in the world—they move and operate driven by prior forces. Similarly, the Tathāgatas’ extraordinary miraculous transformations are guided by their original vows and function spontaneously. Moreover, just as worldly illusionists, when highly accomplished, can perform wonders that amaze many, how much more so the Tathāgatas, who have long cultivated and supremely perfected meditative concentration—how could their spiritual powers and functions be measured? Therefore, you should develop faith and understanding in the inconceivable deeds of the Tathāgatas. Wholeheartedly seek the Buddha’s perfect virtues and sovereign spiritual powers; do not indulge in negligence. There are voice-hearers who, aware that they have no share in the Buddha’s boundless, inconceivable powers, lament and weep, their cries shaking the three thousand worlds. How then can you slander and disbelieve?

復次諸有智者自往涅槃，昧識逢師不能隨學。為顯此義，故說頌曰：

> Furthermore, those with wisdom naturally proceed toward Nirvana, while those with confused understanding, even when encountering a teacher, cannot follow and learn. To clarify this meaning, a verse is spoken:

「智者自涅槃， 是能作難作；愚夫逢善導， 而無隨趣心。」

> The wise attain Nirvana by their own effort, accomplishing what is difficult to achieve; The foolish, even when guided by good teachings, lack the will to follow.

論曰：煩惱纏縛無始時來，數習堅強牢固難斷。涅槃虛寂無相無名，勝德無邊高深難證。諸有智者不因他教，自然能度生死大海，證得究竟大般涅槃，是大丈夫能作難作。愚夫久沒諸欲淤泥，耽味歡娛不求出離，如狗貪齩染血枯骨，雖杖逼之猶不棄捨。愚夫亦爾，味著諸欲，聖言訶責亦不厭離。如是智者，自然開覺證大涅槃，是作難作。愚夫放逸無所覺知，雖遇聖言不希寂滅。

> Discussion: Afflictions and entanglements have been deeply ingrained since beginningless time, repeatedly reinforced until they become stubborn and difficult to sever. Nirvana is empty and tranquil, without form or name; its supreme virtues are boundless, lofty and profound, and hard to realize. Those with wisdom do not rely on others' teachings—they naturally cross the great sea of birth and death and attain the ultimate Great Nirvana. This is what a true person of great capacity accomplishes, achieving what is difficult to achieve. Foolish beings, long submerged in the mud of desires, indulge in pleasures and do not seek liberation—like a dog greedily gnawing on a blood-stained dry bone, unwilling to let go even when beaten with a stick. So too are foolish beings, clinging to desires, unreceptive even when admonished by the sages. Thus, the wise awaken naturally and realize the Great Nirvana—this is accomplishing what is difficult. Foolish beings, heedless and unaware, even when encountering the words of the sages, do not aspire to the peace of cessation.

復次生死甚苦涅槃極樂，過失功德麁著易了，如何有情安然不欲，厭背生死欣趣涅槃？以彼愚癡有怖畏故，謂懷我愛聞涅槃空，恐證無餘我便斷滅。由此怖畏，是故不欲厭背生死欣趣涅槃。如是怖畏由少智生。所以者何？故次頌曰：

> Furthermore, the cycle of birth and death is profoundly painful, while Nirvana is the ultimate bliss. The flaws and virtues of each are starkly evident and easy to understand. How is it, then, that sentient beings remain complacent, not wishing to turn away from birth and death and strive for Nirvana? It is because their foolishness breeds fear. Clinging to the notion of a self, they hear that Nirvana is emptiness and fear that upon attaining the unconditioned state, their 'I' will be utterly annihilated. Due to this terror, they do not wish to renounce birth and death or seek Nirvana. Such fear arises from a lack of wisdom. Why is this so? Therefore, the following verse states:

「不知無怖畏， 遍知亦復然；定由少分知， 而生於怖畏。」

> "Not knowing brings no fear, Nor does complete understanding; It is from partial knowledge That fear arises."

論曰：若諸有情都無覺慧，於一切法無所了知，彼於涅槃不生怖畏。若有遍知諸法正理，彼達生死及與涅槃，生死生時唯假苦生，生死滅時唯假苦滅，本來無我諸法皆空，故於涅槃全無怖畏。若有但解般涅槃時，諸行皆滅都無所有，不知行苦任運自滅，無實體用離我我所。彼由身見我愛所持，聞涅槃中空無所有，懼我斷滅便生怖畏。如是怖畏因少智生，故有智者應正除斷。又非串習故生怖畏。所以者何？故次頌曰：

> The treatise states: If sentient beings entirely lack wisdom and understanding, and have no comprehension of all phenomena, they will not feel fear toward Nirvana. If one fully comprehends the true principle of all phenomena, understanding both Samsara and Nirvana, then when Samsara arises, it is merely the arising of suffering in name; when Samsara ceases, it is merely the cessation of suffering in name. Originally, there is no self, and all phenomena are empty. Therefore, toward Nirvana, there is no fear at all. If one only understands that at the time of entering Nirvana, all conditioned phenomena cease and nothing remains, yet does not realize that suffering inherent in conditioned existence naturally extinguishes itself, without any substantial essence or function, free from self and what belongs to self—then, held by the view of self and attachment to self, upon hearing that in Nirvana there is emptiness and nothingness, one fears the annihilation of self and thus gives rise to terror. Such fear arises from a lack of wisdom; therefore, those with wisdom should rightly eliminate it. Moreover, this fear arises from unfamiliarity. Why is that? Thus, the following verse says:

「生死順流法， 愚夫常習行；未曾修逆流， 是故生怖畏。」

> "Living and dying, flowing with the current— this is what the unwise constantly practice. They have never learned to swim against the stream, and so they live in fear."

論曰：諸異生者說名愚夫，煩惱隨眠無不成就，欣生厭死不樂涅槃。從無始來數曾受領增上生道可愛異熟，未曾修習決定勝道、增上生道。諸果異熟貪等隨眠所依止處，雖為苦火常所焚燒，而不覺知歡娛遊戲，於生死苦常習行故，不知過患無厭離心，於其解脫無罪樂味。由不曾知不樂修證，如世溷猪耽樂糞穢，清閑美膳非所欣求。如是愚夫樂生死苦，於解脫樂無希慕意。由未串習，聞說其名不能信受，反生怖畏。諸有智者由思擇力，於解脫樂應正勤求，勿類愚夫倒生厭怖。

> The Treatise states: Ordinary beings are called the foolish. They are all bound by afflictions and latent tendencies, delighting in life, fearing death, and unwilling to embrace Nirvana. Since beginningless time, they have repeatedly experienced the pleasant results of the higher rebirth path, yet they have never cultivated the path of definite excellence or the higher rebirth path. Though constantly burned by the fire of suffering, which serves as the basis for the ripening of various fruits and the latent tendencies of greed and so forth, they remain unaware and continue to indulge in amusement. Having long been accustomed to the suffering of birth and death, they do not recognize its faults and have no mind of renunciation. They have no taste for the blameless joy of liberation and, having never known it, have no desire to cultivate or realize it. Just as a pig in the world delights in filth and does not seek clean, delicious food, so too do foolish beings take pleasure in the suffering of birth and death and have no longing for the joy of liberation. Unaccustomed to it, when they hear its name, they cannot accept it and instead feel fear. Those who are wise, through the power of discernment, should diligently seek the joy of liberation and not be like the foolish, who mistakenly feel aversion and terror.

復次諸有信求無倒解脫，或性賢善、或由慧力，將修真實見方便時，若於其中為作障礙，所獲罪業其量無邊。為顯此義，故說頌曰：

> Furthermore, for those who sincerely seek correct liberation—whether through their virtuous nature or the power of wisdom—when they are about to cultivate the means to realize the truth, if someone creates obstacles for them, the resulting negative karma is immeasurable. To illustrate this meaning, the following verse is spoken:

「諸有愚癡人， 障他真實見；無由生善趣， 如何證涅槃？」

> Those who, in their foolishness, obstruct others from seeing the truth, How can they be reborn in a favorable state, let alone attain Nirvana?

論曰：真實空見是證圓滿無上智因，又是永滅一切無義涅槃方便。此方便道是不思議功德生處，由是展轉疾證菩提。不住涅槃利樂無盡，隨其所化無量有情根性不同，安立種子及成熟等利樂無窮。諸有愚人，由無明闇覆自慧眼不見真空，復以邪說及餘方便，障他所修如前功德，彼獲罪業無量無邊，唯有如來能知其際。由重惡業染壞其心，後生善趣去之甚遠，隨眠纏縛相續堅牢，種種業因能為重障，方便順忍尚不得生，正見涅槃如何可證？知障正法罪業既深，智者應當自防勿犯。

> The treatise states: The true view of emptiness is the cause for realizing complete and unsurpassed wisdom, and it is also the skillful means to the eternal cessation of all suffering—Nirvana. This path of skillful means is the source of inconceivable merit, and through it, one swiftly attains enlightenment. Without abiding in Nirvana, one brings endless benefit and happiness to beings. According to the varying capacities of countless sentient beings, one plants seeds of liberation and brings them to maturity, creating limitless benefit and joy. Yet there are foolish people whose wisdom-eye is obscured by ignorance, unable to see the truth of emptiness. Moreover, through misleading teachings and other means, they obstruct others from cultivating the aforementioned merits. The karmic offenses they accumulate are immeasurable and boundless; only the Tathagata knows their extent. Through heavy negative karma, their minds become defiled and corrupted. They then stray far from the path to fortunate rebirths, bound tightly by latent afflictions and persistent fetters. Various karmic causes create grave obstacles, so that even the preliminary stages of tolerance and skillful means do not arise—how then could they realize the true view of Nirvana? Knowing that obstructing the true Dharma incurs such profound karmic offenses, the wise should guard themselves and avoid committing such transgressions.

復次諸有障他修正法者，彼後自引邪見令生，此邪見罪過於毀戒。為顯此義，故復頌曰：

> Moreover, those who obstruct others from practicing the true Dharma will later be led to give rise to wrong views themselves. The fault of these wrong views is greater than that of breaking precepts. To reveal this meaning, it is further stated in verse:

「寧毀犯尸羅， 不損壞正見。」

> "Better to break a precept than to damage right view."

論曰：如契經言，寧毀淨戒不壞正見。此意云何？毀淨戒者唯能自壞，若壞正見兼壞自他，令無量生受大苦果，及失無量無邊利樂。又毀戒者由犯戒故，常懷慚愧訶厭自身。壞正見者無慚無愧，讚成邪見恒自貢高。又毀戒者不增邪見，若壞正見令破戒惡未生而生，生已增廣堅固難壞。又毀淨戒但障生天，壞正見者障涅槃樂。所以者何？故次頌曰：

> The Treatise states: As the sutra says, "It is better to break pure precepts than to destroy right view." What does this mean? Breaking pure precepts only harms oneself, but destroying right view harms both oneself and others, causing immeasurable lives to suffer great pain and lose boundless benefits and joys. Moreover, those who break precepts, due to their transgressions, often feel shame and disgust toward themselves. Those who destroy right view feel no shame or remorse; they praise and uphold wrong views and constantly exalt themselves. Furthermore, breaking precepts does not increase wrong views, but destroying right view causes the evil of breaking precepts—if not yet arisen, to arise; if already arisen, to grow, become firm, and difficult to uproot. Also, breaking pure precepts merely obstructs rebirth in heavenly realms, while destroying right view obstructs the bliss of Nirvana. Why is this? Thus, the following verse says:

「尸羅生善趣， 正見得涅槃。」

> Virtuous conduct leads to a fortunate rebirth, while right understanding leads to Nirvana.

論曰：毀戒壞見雖復俱能損壞善因、障礙樂果，然毀戒輕，壞見極重。所以者何？持戒生天，增長結縛受生死苦。正見能證三乘菩提得涅槃樂，是故智者勿壞正見。

> The Treatise states: Although both breaking precepts and corrupting right view can damage virtuous causes and obstruct pleasant results, breaking precepts is relatively minor, while corrupting right view is extremely grave. Why is this? Observing precepts leads to rebirth in heavenly realms, yet it increases the bonds of affliction, subjecting one to the suffering of birth and death. Right view, however, enables the attainment of the enlightenment of the Three Vehicles and the bliss of Nirvana. Therefore, the wise should never corrupt right view.

復次諸法真理何者是邪？謂一切法空無我理。若爾此理亦有過失。所以者何？如有一類聞空無我，謂法皆無，誹撥一切因果正理，乃至斷滅一切善根。此自見有過，非空無我咎。由惡取空妄起邪見，行諸惡行空無我理，心言不測非彼所證。愚夫聞說諸法皆空，不知聖意，便撥世俗因果亦無，滅諸善法。此豈是空無我過失？聖說空教有何意耶？為遣一切虛妄有執。若爾亦應說諸法有，為遣妄執諸法空故。實爾若有執諸法空，如來亦說諸法是有。既為遣執說有說空，諸法真理為空為有？諸法真理非有非空，分別戲論皆不能及。何緣聖說非虛妄耶？為除邪執故非虛妄。空有二教俱能除執，何故如來多說空教？以諸有情多分執有，生死多分從有執生，是故如來為除有執滅生死苦，多說空教。若空若有皆是教門，何故前說空為真理？方便假說亦不相違。又此空言是遮非表，非唯空有亦復空空，遍遣執心令契諸法非有非空究竟真理。諸法真理實非空性，空為門故假說為空。真理非空，空為門者，真理非有，應有為門。隨機說門，有亦無過。然其門義順在於空，有有有等皆順執心，空空空等皆違妄執，故有智者聞說空言，應離一切有無等執，悟法真理非有非無，勿起有無分別戲論。

> Furthermore, regarding the truth of all phenomena—what is it? It is the principle that all phenomena are empty and without self. If that is the case, does this principle also have faults? Why might one ask this? For example, there are some who, upon hearing about emptiness and the absence of self, believe that all phenomena are nothingness. They deny all principles of cause and effect, even going so far as to sever all roots of goodness. This is a flaw in their own understanding, not a fault of emptiness or the absence of self. Due to wrongly grasping emptiness, they give rise to distorted views and engage in unwholesome actions. The principle of emptiness and the absence of self is profound and beyond the reach of ordinary thought and speech—it is not something they have realized. When foolish people hear that all phenomena are empty, they fail to understand the intention of the sages. They then deny even the conventional truth of cause and effect and destroy all wholesome dharmas. How can this be considered a fault of emptiness or the absence of self? What is the intention behind the sages’ teachings on emptiness? It is to eliminate all false attachments to existence. If that is the case, should they not also teach that phenomena exist, in order to eliminate attachments to emptiness? Indeed, if there are those who cling to the emptiness of phenomena, the Tathāgata also teaches that phenomena exist. Since both existence and emptiness are taught to counter attachments, is the ultimate truth of phenomena empty or existent? The ultimate truth of phenomena is neither existent nor empty—it is beyond all conceptual distinctions and speculative thinking. Why, then, are the sages’ teachings not false? They are not false because they are meant to eliminate distorted attachments. Both teachings—existence and emptiness—can eliminate attachments, so why does the Tathāgata mostly teach emptiness? It is because sentient beings mostly cling to existence, and much of the suffering of birth and death arises from this attachment. Therefore, to eliminate attachment to existence and extinguish the suffering of birth and death, the Tathāgata mostly teaches emptiness. Both emptiness and existence are skillful means—why was emptiness previously called the ultimate truth? It is a provisional designation for the sake of guidance, and there is no contradiction. Moreover, the term "emptiness" is meant to negate, not to affirm. It is not only emptiness that is negated—even emptiness itself is emptied. It universally dispels all clinging minds, enabling one to realize that phenomena are neither existent nor empty, and to penetrate the ultimate truth. The ultimate truth of phenomena is not inherently empty—emptiness is merely a gateway. For the sake of guidance, it is provisionally called emptiness. If the ultimate truth is not empty, and emptiness is the gateway, then if the ultimate truth is not existent, existence should also be a gateway. Teaching according to the capacity of beings, even existence is not wrong. However, the meaning of the gateway is more aligned with emptiness. Teachings on existence and the like tend to reinforce clinging, while teachings on emptiness and the like tend to counteract false attachments. Therefore, those with wisdom, upon hearing the teaching of emptiness, should let go of all attachments to existence and non-existence, realizing that the truth of phenomena is neither existent nor non-existent, and not give rise to conceptual distinctions and speculative debates about existence and non-existence.

復次劣慧者前不應輒說空無我理增其惡見。所以者何？故次頌曰：

> Furthermore, one should not hastily expound the principles of emptiness and selflessness to those of inferior wisdom, lest it reinforce their wrong views. Why is that? As the following verse states:

「寧彼起我執， 非空無我見；後兼向惡趣， 初唯背涅槃。」

> It is better to hold the view of self than to cling to the view of emptiness; the latter leads to the lower realms, while the former only turns away from Nirvana.

論曰：彼謂世間諸劣慧者，我執即是薩迦耶見，其我所見亦帶我執，故我執言亦攝彼見。我執雖復不稱正理，而寧彼起過失輕故。空無我見雖稱正理，然彼不能如實了達，因斯誹撥諸法皆無，過失重故寧彼不起。云何此二過失輕重？謂初我執唯背涅槃，後惡取空兼向惡趣。彼劣慧者惡取空時尚厭善根，況諸含識。彼由厭背善及世間，斷滅善根損害含識，非唯棄背清涼涅槃，亦持自身足地獄火。起我見者無如是事。所以者何？彼貪我樂欲我離苦，不造眾罪廣修諸福，脫諸惡趣不失人天，但怖涅槃不證解脫。故契經說，寧起我見如妙高山，非惡取空增上慢者，若爾諸法空無我理隣近險趣，聖不應說。劣慧者前實不應說，而勝慧者隨此修行獲大義利故須為說。所以者何？故次頌曰：

> The treatise states: Some claim that for ordinary people of inferior wisdom, the view of self is the view of a real person, and the view of what belongs to self also involves attachment to self. Therefore, the term "self-attachment" also includes that view. Although self-attachment does not accord with true principle, it is preferable for it to arise because its faults are minor. Although the view of emptiness and non-self accords with true principle, those of inferior wisdom cannot comprehend it correctly. Consequently, they deny the existence of all phenomena, and because the fault of this is grave, it is better for such a view not to arise in them. How do these two differ in the severity of their faults? The first, self-attachment, only turns one away from nirvana, while the latter, the pernicious view of emptiness, also leads toward the lower realms. When those of inferior wisdom fall into the pernicious view of emptiness, they even become averse to virtuous roots, let alone to sentient beings. By turning away from goodness and the world, they sever virtuous roots and harm sentient beings. Not only do they abandon the cool peace of nirvana, they also cast themselves into the fires of hell. Those who hold the view of self do not commit such acts. Why is this? They crave happiness for the self and wish to avoid suffering for the self, so they refrain from creating many misdeeds and extensively cultivate merits. They escape the lower realms and do not lose the human or heavenly paths. They only fear nirvana and do not attain liberation. Therefore, the sutra says, "It is better to hold the view of self as massive as Mount Sumeru than to be one who clings to the pernicious view of emptiness with arrogance." If that is so, then the principle of emptiness and non-self of all phenomena borders on a dangerous path, and the sages should not teach it. Indeed, it should not be taught to those of inferior wisdom, but for those of superior wisdom, practicing accordingly brings great benefit, so it must be taught. Why is this? Thus, the following verse says:

「空無我妙理， 諸佛真境界，能怖眾惡見， 涅槃不二門。」

> "The profound truth of emptiness and no-self is the true realm of all Buddhas. It dispels all harmful views, opening the single gate to Nirvana."

論曰：求解脫者除妙空觀，無別方便能證涅槃。智者欲除諸惡見垢，離此無有餘勝方便。有見執有所緣境故，如餘有見不證涅槃，亦不能除諸惡見垢。修此空行至究竟者，能證極果無上菩提，普為有情方便開示，復令圓證所求妙果。諸有能成自他利樂，空無我觀最為勝因，故應善知有情根性，方便開示令其悟入。

> It is said: For those seeking liberation, apart from the profound insight into emptiness, there is no other skillful means to realize Nirvana. The wise who wish to eliminate the stains of all wrong views have no superior method beyond this. Those who cling to views, grasping at perceived objects, like others holding such views, cannot attain Nirvana, nor can they remove the stains of wrong views. Those who cultivate this practice of emptiness to its ultimate end can realize the supreme fruit of unsurpassed Enlightenment, skillfully reveal it for the benefit of all beings, and enable them to fully attain the wondrous fruit they seek. Among all that can accomplish benefit and happiness for oneself and others, the insight into emptiness and non-self is the supreme cause. Therefore, one should skillfully discern the capacities of beings, and with skillful means, reveal and guide them to awaken to it.

復次如來為除惡見鬼魅，說空無我阿揭陀藥。所以者何？諸惡見者聞說空名皆生怖畏，漸次調伏自然息除。為顯此義，故說頌曰：

> Furthermore, the Buddha taught the doctrine of emptiness and selflessness as a supreme medicine to dispel the delusions and afflictions of wrong views. Why is this? Those who cling to mistaken views feel fear upon hearing the teaching of emptiness, but gradually, through skillful guidance, their fears naturally subside and cease. To illustrate this meaning, a verse is spoken:

「愚聞空法名， 皆生大怖畏；如見大力者， 怯劣悉奔逃。」

> "When the foolish hear the name of emptiness, they all feel great terror; like the timid fleeing in panic at the sight of a mighty warrior."

論曰：愚謂惡見損覆慧眼，彼聞空名，諸惡見命自然損害。空雖無心欲害惡見，而力大故聞名自滅，如聞虎名怯者自喪。又如世間調善龍象，於其兩頰威汗交流，雖復無心損害物命，而彼龍象威力大故，其見聞者驚怖奔逃。空理亦然，威力大故，令惡見者聞名驚怖自然損滅。空理無心，非為損物，證空理者，應為害他。若證真空，其心寂靜、平等無二，豈欲害他？然為利樂諸有情故，方便開示空無我理，懷惡見者聞之自滅。為顯此義，故次頌曰：

> It is said: I believe that distorted views obscure the eye of wisdom. When those who hold such views hear the name of emptiness, their distorted views are naturally destroyed. Although emptiness itself has no intention to harm distorted views, its power is so great that merely hearing its name causes them to vanish, just as the timid may faint upon hearing the name of a tiger. It is also like a well-trained elephant in the world, whose cheeks flow with majestic sweat. Though it has no intention to harm living beings, its immense power causes those who see or hear it to flee in terror. The principle of emptiness is the same—its power is so great that those holding distorted views are frightened upon hearing its name and naturally perish. The principle of emptiness has no intention; it does not seek to harm others. Those who realize emptiness should not harm others either. If one attains true emptiness, the mind becomes tranquil, impartial, and undivided—how could it wish to harm others? Yet, for the benefit and happiness of all sentient beings, they skillfully reveal the principles of emptiness and selflessness. Those harboring distorted views, upon hearing this, naturally perish. To illustrate this meaning, the following verse is presented:

「諸佛雖無心， 說摧他論法；而他論自壞， 如野火焚薪。」

> "Though Buddhas have no desire to defeat others' views, they teach the Dharma that dismantles false arguments. And those wrong views crumble on their own, like dry grass consumed by wildfire."

論曰：諸佛無心欲摧他論，然為利樂所化有情，開示昔來諸佛廣路，謂一切法性相皆空。前後如來無不遊履，從因至果引導群迷。外道邪徒諸惡見論，聞斯空教自然壞滅。如在山林野火騰焰，濕薪積木烈日所乾，雖無有人持火來就，然薪逼火如自引燒。惡見邪徒諸論亦爾，空教勢力而自崩摧。

> The treatise states: All Buddhas do not intentionally seek to refute others' doctrines. However, for the benefit and happiness of sentient beings who can be guided, they reveal the broad path that all Buddhas of the past have walked—the teaching that the nature and characteristics of all phenomena are empty. From beginning to end, all Buddhas have traveled this path, guiding the confused from cause to fruit. When the heretics and followers of evil views hear this teaching of emptiness, their doctrines naturally crumble. It is like a wildfire blazing in the forest: when damp firewood and piled logs are dried by the scorching sun, even if no one brings a flame to them, the wood, pressed close to the fire, seems to ignite on its own. So too, the doctrines of heretics and evil views collapse under the power of the emptiness teaching.

復次諸外道宗皆說妄有，欲令棄捨故說真空。所以者何？故次頌曰：

> Furthermore, the teachings of other schools all assert the false existence of things. To encourage people to let go of these attachments, the doctrine of true emptiness is taught. Why is this so? As the following verse states:

「諸有悟正法， 定不樂邪宗；為餘出偽門， 故顯真空義。」

> Those who have realized the true Dharma will never delight in false teachings. To guide others away from deceptive paths, the meaning of true emptiness is revealed.

論曰：有智自能簡別真偽，遇此正法不樂邪宗，如識寶人得無價寶，終不復樂餘水精珠。諸外道宗皆立妄有，去正法遠如假偽門，誑惑有情令失大利。故我顯示佛教真空，令彼邪徒趣真背偽。

> The Treatise states: Those with wisdom naturally know how to distinguish truth from falsehood. When they encounter this true Dharma, they will not delight in heretical doctrines. It is like a person who recognizes treasure—once they obtain a priceless jewel, they will never again take pleasure in mere crystal beads. All heretical teachings establish false existence; they are far removed from the true Dharma, like a deceptive gate that misleads sentient beings, causing them to lose the great benefit. Therefore, I reveal the true emptiness of the Buddha's teaching, so that those misguided followers may turn toward truth and turn away from falsehood.

復次何緣外道欣樂邪宗、厭背聖教，由身見力。若知無我必無欣厭。所以者何？故次頌曰：

> Furthermore, why do non-Buddhists delight in false doctrines and turn away from the true teachings? It is due to the power of self-view. If one realizes there is no self, there will be no such delight or aversion. Why is that? Therefore, the next verse says:

「若知佛所說， 真空無我理，隨順不生欣， 乖違無厭怖。」

> If one understands the truth of emptiness and non-self as taught by the Buddha, they will not delight in conformity nor fear and resent what contradicts it.

論曰：若知佛教空無我理，斷除身見所起隨眠，觀察世間如空舍宅，虛妄諸行生死輪迴，興盛無欣、衰損無厭，無憂無喜無畏泰然。若有身見謂我損益，衰盛起時便生憂喜，因斯便有怖畏無窮。故有智人應除我執。

> The treatise states: If one understands the Buddhist teaching of emptiness and non-self, cuts off the latent tendencies arising from the view of a self, and sees the world as an empty house—a cycle of birth and death composed of illusory phenomena—then neither prosperity brings joy, nor decline brings sorrow. There is no anxiety, no elation, no fear, only peace. But if one clings to the view of a self, seeing gain and loss as personal, then rise and fall give rise to worry and delight, and from this endless fear arises. Therefore, the wise should abandon attachment to self.

復次諸外道眾由著我執，能為自縛亦縛有情，所損既多深可悲愍。為顯此義，故說頌曰：

> Furthermore, those who follow other paths, clinging to the notion of a self, bind themselves and also bind other beings. The harm they cause is immense and deeply pitiable. To reveal this truth, a verse is spoken:

「見諸外道眾， 為多無義因；樂正法有情， 誰不深悲愍？」

> "Seeing these followers of other paths, pursuing many meaningless causes; Who among those who delight in the true Dharma would not feel deep compassion?"

論曰：諸外道眾貪愛我執，能令自他起無量罪，薩迦耶見是一切惡生根本故。如說所有惡不善法，一切皆以薩迦耶見為本而生。諸有中懷樂善法者，自無定執隨順他緣，為彼外道邪言誑惑，亦貪我見起無量罪。如是外道能令自他俱起種種堅固纏縛，誰有智人而不悲愍？故樂正法淨意有情，起利樂心應深悲愍，慇懃為說無我真空，令修正見離諸繫縛。

> It is said: All external paths and their followers, clinging to the self with greed and attachment, bring immeasurable suffering upon themselves and others. The view of self-existence is the root from which all evils arise. As it is taught, all unwholesome and harmful states of mind arise fundamentally from the view of self-existence. Those who hold within them a love for wholesome qualities, yet lack firm understanding and easily follow external influences, are also deceived by the misleading words of external paths, clinging to the view of self and giving rise to immeasurable suffering. In this way, external paths cause both themselves and others to become firmly entangled in all kinds of bondage. Who, possessing wisdom, would not feel compassion? Therefore, those who delight in the true Dharma and have a pure intention should give rise to a mind of benefit and compassion, deeply pitying them, and diligently teach the emptiness of self and true reality, enabling them to cultivate right view and free themselves from all bonds.

復次諸佛菩薩常住於世，實有真淨利樂他心。何故？世間猶有無量信邪倒見謗法有情，由佛所說境智甚深微細難悟。外道不爾。所以者何？故次頌曰：

> Furthermore, the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas constantly abide in the world, truly possessing a pure and genuine intention to benefit and bring happiness to others. Why is this so? Because in the world, there are still countless beings who hold wrong views, believe in false paths, and slander the Dharma. This is due to the profound and subtle nature of the realms and wisdom taught by the Buddha, which are difficult to comprehend. The non-Buddhist paths are not like this. Why is that? Therefore, the following verse states:

「婆羅門離繫， 如來三所宗，眼耳意能知， 故佛法深細。」

> "Brahmanas and ascetics, the three doctrines of the Tathagata, Through eye, ear, and mind they may be known, Thus the Buddha's Dharma is profound and subtle."

論曰：諸婆羅門，唯常習誦虛言為道，耳識能知，非是深細。離繫外道，唯以露形身體臭穢種種猛利自苦為道，眼識能知，亦非深細。如來聖教，以證真空無漏慧劍，永斷所有內煩惱賊，獲得無上正等菩提，利益安樂一切含識，理教意趣甚深微細。諸有通達如實理者，於佛聖教或知不知，由佛理教最深細故，外道愚夫不能悟入。外信外道麁淺邪言，少信如來深細聖教。世間多信婆羅門者，以婆羅門多行誑詐，誦呪祠火自苦除愆，矯設吉祥妄說禍福，為活命故種種方便，誑諸女人戍達羅等，令於彼所生希有心，供給所須推為尊貴。古昔黠慧諸婆羅門，隱造明書言自然有，唯得自誦不許他觀。讚婆羅門最為尊貴，剎帝利等皆是卑賤，給施所須獲無量福。愚夫無智不能測量，謂真福田信敬供養。然彼明書非自然有，有所詮故如世俗言。又彼明書非盡稱理，非聖說故如虛誑言。婆羅門種非實尊貴、非真福田，常行乞匂養妻兒故，如貧癩者故，有智人不應歸信。婆羅門法既多誑詐，離繫外道所學如何？彼所學法多順愚癡。所以者何？故次頌曰：

> The treatise states: The various Brahmins merely take the constant recitation of empty words as their path; this can be perceived by the ear consciousness and is not profound or subtle. The naked ascetics take only the exposure of their bodies, their filth and foulness, and all kinds of intense self-mortification as their path; this can be perceived by the eye consciousness and is also not profound or subtle. The sacred teachings of the Tathagata, through the realization of true emptiness and the sword of non-outflow wisdom, eternally sever all inner afflictive thieves, attain the unsurpassed, perfect enlightenment, and bring benefit, peace, and happiness to all sentient beings. Their principles, teachings, meanings, and purposes are extremely profound and subtle. Those who comprehend the true reality may or may not understand the sacred teachings of the Buddha, because the principles and teachings of the Buddha are so profound and subtle that foolish outsiders cannot awaken to and enter them. Outsiders believe in the coarse, shallow, and erroneous words of external paths and have little faith in the profound and subtle sacred teachings of the Tathagata. In the world, many believe in the Brahmins because the Brahmins often engage in deceit and fraud, reciting mantras, making fire offerings, and practicing self-mortification to eliminate transgressions. They falsely establish auspicious signs and recklessly speak of fortune and misfortune; for the sake of livelihood, they employ all sorts of expedient means to deceive women, Shudras, and others, making them develop a sense of longing and reverence toward them, supplying their needs and elevating them as noble. In ancient times, cunning and clever Brahmins secretly composed scriptures, claiming they arose naturally, allowing only themselves to recite them and forbidding others to read them. They praised the Brahmins as the most noble, while Kshatriyas and others were all lowly and base, and that giving alms to them would bring immeasurable merit. Foolish people, lacking wisdom and unable to discern, regarded them as true fields of merit and believed in and made offerings to them with reverence. However, those scriptures did not arise naturally; since they have meaning to be explained, they are like worldly words. Moreover, those scriptures are not entirely in accordance with principle, for they are not spoken by sages and are like false and deceptive words. The Brahmin caste is not truly noble, nor are they true fields of merit, for they constantly beg for alms to support their wives and children, like poor lepers. Therefore, wise people should not take refuge in or believe in them. Since the Brahmin teachings are full of deceit and fraud, what about the teachings of the naked ascetics? Their teachings mostly accord with foolishness. Why is that? Therefore, the following verse says:

「婆羅門所宗， 多令行誑詐；離繫外道法， 多分順愚癡。」

> The teachings of the Brahmins often lead to deceitful practices; The doctrines of the ascetics largely cater to foolishness.

論曰：離繫外道都不知真，唯貪後樂現受劇苦。諸有所言多不合理，愚癡種類聚結成群，為世愚癡之所歸信。云何決定知彼愚癡？以露身形無羞恥故，如狂如畜、如似嬰兒。若婆羅門實非尊貴，何緣貴勝亦敬事之？以彼習誦諸明論故。諸婆羅門實無所識，為活命故於一切時誦諸明論，詐現異相以動人心。世間貴勝不審觀察，謂其有德故敬事之。又明論中雖無勝義，而有世俗少分禮儀，世間貴勝為習學故，彼雖無德亦申敬事。餘有不誦諸明論者，以同類故世俗相承，不審觀察亦兼敬事。離繫外道與彼不同，云何世間亦多敬事？以其薄知星歷道度觀鳥解夢占相吉凶，故凡愚人多申敬事。又婆羅門誦諸明論，以難成故世共敬之，離繫外道以苦行故世共愍念。此皆不能解脫生死，諸有智者當正了知，勿隨彼見。故次頌曰：

> The text states: The ascetics who practice extreme self-denial are entirely ignorant of the truth. They merely crave future pleasures while enduring intense suffering in the present. Most of their teachings are unreasonable. This foolish kind gather in groups and are trusted by the world's ignorant. How can we be certain they are foolish? Because they expose their bodies without shame, acting like madmen, beasts, or infants. If the Brahmins are not truly noble, why do the powerful and esteemed also revere them? It is because they recite the sacred texts. In truth, the Brahmins possess no real knowledge. To make a living, they recite these texts at all times, putting on an extraordinary appearance to sway people's hearts. The world's elite, without careful examination, believe them to be virtuous and thus honor them. Moreover, although the sacred texts contain no profound truth, they do include some worldly rituals and etiquette. The world's elite, for the sake of learning these, show respect to the Brahmins even though they lack true virtue. Others who do not recite the sacred texts are also honored by association, as they belong to the same class and are upheld by tradition, without careful scrutiny. The ascetics who practice extreme self-denial are different from them. Why then are they also widely respected in the world? It is because they possess a superficial knowledge of astrology, divination, dream interpretation, and fortune-telling. Thus, ordinary foolish people often show them reverence. Furthermore, the Brahmins are respected by the world because reciting the sacred texts is considered difficult. The ascetics who practice extreme self-denial are pitied by the world because of their severe austerities. Yet, none of these can liberate one from the cycle of birth and death. Those who are wise should understand this clearly and not follow their views. Hence, the following verse says:

「恭敬婆羅門， 為誦諸明故；愍念離繫者， 由自苦其身。」

> "Respect the Brahmin, for they recite the sacred texts; Have compassion for the ascetic, who torments their own body."

論曰：婆羅門法勤誦諸明，世以為難故共恭敬。然諸明論非解脫因，但有虛言無實義故。離繫外道極自苦身亦以為難，世共愍念。云何自苦非解脫因？是異熟果非善法故。彼拔髮等所生身苦，由過去世惡行所招，是業異熟非善法故，如樂異熟非解脫因。若言此苦現功力生，非異熟果因不成者，此亦不然。彼所受苦是異熟果，以無所益，與色根識俱生苦故，如地獄中所受身苦。自部亦有不許此苦是異熟者，應以此量而決了之。諸有身苦非異熟者，亦非能證解脫親因，有漏身受現緣生故，如婬欲樂。又彼自苦非解脫因，違聖教故，如自害苦。彼師所說非是聖教，非如來等所共說故，如婬書等。故彼自苦，但是前世惡行所招，及以現在愚癡所起，定非能證真解脫因。

> It is said: In the Brahmanical tradition, diligent recitation of the sacred texts is considered difficult, and thus it is widely revered. However, these texts are not the cause of liberation, for they consist of empty words without true meaning. Similarly, the ascetics of the non-Brahmanical path subject themselves to extreme bodily hardships, which is also regarded as difficult, and the world pities them. Why are such self-inflicted sufferings not the cause of liberation? Because they are the result of past karma, not virtuous actions. The bodily pains they endure—such as tearing out their hair—are brought about by evil deeds committed in past lives; they are the ripening of karma, not virtuous acts, just as pleasurable results are not the cause of liberation. If one argues that these sufferings arise from present effort and are not the fruit of past karma, this is also incorrect. The sufferings they undergo are indeed the result of past karma, as they are unbeneficial pains that arise together with the senses and consciousness, just like the bodily pains experienced in hell. Even within their own tradition, some do not accept that these sufferings are the result of karma. This should be clarified through reasoning. Any bodily suffering that is not the result of karma is also not the direct cause for attaining liberation, because such suffering arises from present conditions and is tainted, like the pleasure of sensual desire. Moreover, their self-inflicted suffering is not the cause of liberation, as it contradicts the teachings of the sages, just like the suffering of self-harm. The teachings of their masters are not the sacred teachings, for they are not proclaimed by the enlightened ones, like writings on sensual pleasure. Therefore, their self-inflicted suffering is merely the result of past evil deeds and arises from present ignorance; it is certainly not the true cause for attaining liberation.

復次有作是言：依尊勝身能得解脫，世間尊勝謂婆羅門，故婆羅門能證解脫，非餘雜類可得涅槃。此說不然，故次頌曰：

> Furthermore, some claim that liberation can only be attained through a noble and superior form of existence. They hold that the highest and most esteemed beings in the world are the Brahmins, and therefore only Brahmins can achieve liberation; no other mixed or lower classes can attain Nirvana. This view is incorrect, as the following verse explains:

「如苦業所感， 非真解脫因；勝身業所生， 亦非證解脫。」

> Just as suffering born from negative karma is not the true cause of liberation, so too a fortunate existence born from virtuous deeds does not lead to enlightenment.

論曰：如離繫宗所受身苦，業異熟故非解脫因。婆羅門身設許尊勝，亦業所感非解脫因。身雖不能親證解脫，而身中善是解脫因。若爾餘身善亦如是，云何但說婆羅門耶？又婆羅門根境等法，與餘種類一切皆同，云何自言彼勝餘劣？是故彼說唯誑愚夫，諸有智人不應信受。然婆羅門非勝餘類此洲人故，如戍達羅。戍達羅等非劣彼姓，此洲人故，如婆羅門。既言外道所說皆虛，未知如來法有何實？為遣此疑，故說頌曰：

> The treatise states: For example, the physical suffering endured by the ascetic sects is the result of karma and not the cause of liberation. Even if we grant that the Brahmin body is considered superior, it too is produced by karma and is not the cause of liberation. Although the body itself cannot directly realize liberation, the wholesome qualities within the body are indeed the cause of liberation. If that is so, then wholesome qualities in other bodies are also like this—why then speak only of Brahmins? Moreover, the faculties, objects, and other elements of Brahmins are entirely the same as those of other classes. How can they claim to be superior and others inferior? Therefore, their claims only deceive the foolish; those with wisdom should not accept them. Furthermore, Brahmins are not superior to other classes because they are human beings of this continent, just like the Shudras. Shudras and others are not inferior to that caste because they too are human beings of this continent, just like the Brahmins. Since it is said that the teachings of external paths are all false, one might wonder: What truth does the Buddha's Dharma possess? To dispel this doubt, the following verse is spoken:

「略言佛所說， 具二別餘宗：不害生人天， 觀空證解脫。」

> "In brief, what the Buddha taught has two distinctions from other traditions: Non-harming leads to rebirth in the human or heavenly realms, and contemplating emptiness leads to liberation."

論曰：佛說無量深妙法門，利樂有情要唯二種：一者不害能感人天；二者觀空能證解脫。損惱他意及所發生身語二業總名為害，若能斷彼所說害法，修諸善因名為不害，謂十善業，布施愛語利行同事，及諸靜慮無色定等。由此得生人天善趣，受諸勝妙無染果報。依此能除一切煩惱，及能修習無量善因。真如實際離相名空，正觀此空，證涅槃樂空無我理，於諸法中無相無名，咸同一味寂靜安樂，即是涅槃，此必觀空方可證故。如是善趣解脫二因，唯佛法中具足可得。外道雖說施等少分生人天因而不圓滿。所以者何？彼諸外道無有顯析因果智故，不言意思生勝福故，無別解脫律儀法故。善趣麁業尚不委知，涅槃妙因故其絕分。如來所說理教周圓，外道邪徒如何不樂？由佛正教違彼邪宗，乖本所貪故不欣樂。為顯此義而說頌曰：

> The Treatise states: The Buddha taught countless profound and wonderful Dharma methods, yet the essential means to benefit and bring happiness to sentient beings are ultimately of two kinds: first, non-harming, which can lead to rebirth in the human or heavenly realms; second, contemplation of emptiness, which can realize liberation. Harm is the general term for the intention to injure others and the bodily and verbal actions that arise from it. If one can abandon such harmful ways and cultivate wholesome causes, this is called non-harming. This refers to the ten wholesome actions, the practices of giving, kind speech, beneficial conduct, and shared purpose, as well as the meditative absorptions of the form and formless realms. Through these, one is reborn in the fortunate realms of humans or gods, experiencing sublime, undefiled karmic results. Relying on this foundation, one can eliminate all afflictions and cultivate immeasurable wholesome causes. The true reality, the ultimate truth, free from characteristics, is called emptiness. Correctly contemplating this emptiness leads to the realization of the bliss of Nirvana—the principle of emptiness and non-self. In all phenomena, there is no characteristic, no name; all merge into a single flavor of tranquil peace and bliss. This is Nirvana. It can only be realized through the contemplation of emptiness. Thus, the two causes for fortunate rebirth and for liberation are fully and completely found only within the Buddha's teaching. Although non-Buddhist paths speak of giving and similar practices as partial causes for human or heavenly rebirth, they are incomplete. Why is this? Those non-Buddhist followers lack the wisdom to clearly analyze cause and effect. They do not speak of the mind's intention as generating superior merit. They lack the specific disciplinary methods of the Pratimokṣa. They do not fully understand even the coarse karma leading to fortunate rebirths; how much less could they comprehend the subtle cause for Nirvana? They are entirely cut off from it. The teachings and principles proclaimed by the Tathagata are perfectly complete. Why then do non-Buddhist adherents not take delight in them? It is because the Buddha's correct teaching contradicts their erroneous doctrines and goes against their fundamental attachments and desires; therefore, they do not rejoice in it. To clarify this meaning, a verse is spoken:

「世人耽自宗， 如愛本生地；正法能摧滅， 邪黨不生欣。」

> "People cling to their own views, like loving their homeland; True Dharma can shatter them, yet the misguided find no joy."

論曰：如本生地雖不膏腴，久處其中而不願捨。自宗亦爾，雖與理違，以本師承故不能離，尚不欲樂餘外道宗，況慕如來甘露聖教。甚深實相真空智火，能焚外道邪執積薪，違彼本心故不欣樂。諸有智者應善思惟，勿染邪宗致違正法。

> The treatise states: Just as one is born and raised in a land, even if it is not fertile, one grows accustomed to it over time and is unwilling to leave. The same applies to one's own school of thought: even if it contradicts reason, because it has been inherited from one's teacher, one cannot abandon it. Such a person does not even desire to embrace the doctrines of other external schools, let alone aspire to the Tathagata's sacred teaching of nectar. The profound wisdom-fire of true emptiness, which reveals ultimate reality, can burn away the accumulated fuel of heretical attachments. Yet, because it contradicts their ingrained views, they do not take delight in it. Those who possess wisdom should reflect carefully: do not become tainted by erroneous doctrines, lest you turn away from the true Dharma.

復次佛法普照如盛日輪，求勝智人應當信仰。為顯此義，故說頌曰：

> Furthermore, the Dharma of the Buddha shines everywhere like the brilliant sun. Those who seek supreme wisdom should have faith in it. To illustrate this meaning, a verse is spoken:

「有智求勝德， 應信受真宗；正法如日輪， 有目因能見。」

> Those who seek supreme virtue with wisdom should believe and accept the true teaching; the true Dharma is like the sun, and those with eyes can see it.

論曰：此中顯示要具二德能信大乘：一者有知；二者希求殊勝功德。大乘能滅一切邪宗，隨順大乘多所饒益，謂自能證無上涅槃，令他有情亦出生死。大乘正法如彼日輪，普為世間破無明闇，有慧目者因此法光，分明照知真偽色像，背邪從正避嶮求安，利樂自他無不成辦。諸有智者應信大乘，勿顧邪宗誹毀正法，自受沈溺生死淤泥，誑惑有情令失大利。智與愚異，謂識是非，智勿似愚不辨真偽。若有真實利樂他心，應以大乘摧邪立正，勤修空觀速證菩提，利樂有情窮未來際。

> The treatise states: Here it is shown that to have faith in the Mahayana, one must possess two virtues: first, wisdom; second, the aspiration for supreme merit. The Mahayana can extinguish all false doctrines, and aligning with it brings great benefit—enabling oneself to attain supreme nirvana and helping other sentient beings also escape the cycle of birth and death. The true Dharma of the Mahayana is like the sun, universally dispelling the darkness of ignorance in the world. Those with the eyes of wisdom, by this Dharma-light, clearly perceive the true and false appearances, turn away from error and follow the right, avoid danger and seek safety, bringing benefit and happiness to oneself and others—all can be accomplished. Those with wisdom should have faith in the Mahayana, not heed the slander of false doctrines against the true Dharma, lest they sink themselves into the mire of birth and death and deceive sentient beings, causing them to lose great benefit. The wise differ from the foolish in their ability to discern right from wrong. The wise should not be like the foolish, unable to distinguish truth from falsehood. If one truly has a mind that seeks to benefit and bring happiness to others, one should use the Mahayana to overthrow falsehood and establish truth, diligently cultivate the contemplation of emptiness, swiftly attain enlightenment, and bring benefit and happiness to sentient beings throughout the endless future.

## 大乘廣百論釋論卷第六

> The Great Vehicle Extensive Hundred Treatise Commentary, Volume Six