手杖論一卷
The Treatise on the Staff, Volume One
尊者釋迦稱造
Reverend Shakyamuni's Composition
大唐三藏法師義淨奉詔譯
Translator: Tripitaka Master Yijing of the Great Tang, by Imperial Decree
世間一類有情為無慧解便生邪執，由彼沈淪生憐愍故，今造斯論。頌曰：
Some beings in the world, lacking wisdom and understanding, cling to false views. Out of compassion for their suffering and delusion, this treatise is now composed. The verse says:
設於平坦道， 有步步顛蹶，
為此等愚蒙， 談茲手杖論。
If you walk on level ground, yet keep stumbling at every step, Then for such foolish people, I set forth the teaching of the staff.
論曰：一一世尊出現於世，而便寂滅阿僧企耶諸有情類。然諸有情無有終際，猶若虛空，無邊性故。此是世親菩薩之所述理。邊謂斷割爾許數量，是一義故。為遮此故，故曰無邊。所言終者，是盡了義，為此便無所立能立不相離過。宗言無終，因云無邊，是宗一分過也。有異論者作如是說：許未曾有新生有情，猶如神村。如彼計云，如林薄等雖有眾多斫伐等費，見摧殘已而更新生。因無窮盡，由斯定許別有未曾新起有情，略詮述故。如略詮中作如是說，因問致答，命藥軍曰：有舊有情、有新眾生，如是廣說。是故決定應如是許。若異此者，如油麻等聚無新添數而損減，必定見其有終盡故。爾者如若許有未曾有情，今始新起，此即便成許其生死有最初也。若許有始，彼即便有無因之過。既許無因，一切皆應無因而有。此是阿遮利耶之本意也。彼復於此而為答曰：由有於子造相屬業，善不善二法等種子，阿陀那識、羯剌羅等事，此謂最初而得生起。既屬著已，由近善惡自造諸業而入流轉或出涅槃，斯乃善順緣生道理，即是僧塞迦羅八底也、毘若南婆薄八底也。社底既有斯義，如何強逼許有新生有情？論者便成生死有最初失。有別論者曰：此非雅答。何為也？若容有新生，彼便有增剩。由增待其減，初者是無因。若云此新有情曾不了知生死意趣，但由他業為緣力故忽爾得生。若如是者，彼諸有情今受流轉，一一剎那展轉相生便成增剩。由斯道理，彼新生論便應許有初一有情，由許增者待其減故，一切時中許有新生眾多有情。是諸情數定有其增，前前剎那待其減故。若如此者能減轉少，乃至將終成唯獨一。然此最初不待餘業便成最初，是無因有，斯固不能辨無因過。若言必定有增剩者，可招此過。有加無費是增剩因，如慳人物。然諸有情有其減理。何者？一一佛圖嗢波柁而令無算眾多有情入於圓寂亦不如是。頌曰：
Scripture says: Each and every Buddha that appears in the world leads countless beings to the calm of nirvana. Yet beings have no end—like the sky, they are limitless in nature. This is the principle taught by the great sage Vasubandhu.
“End” means a boundary that cuts off a certain number; that is its meaning. To refute this, it is said to be “limitless.” The term “end” implies finality. If this were accepted, the argument would be flawed because the proposition and its proof would not align. To claim that “beings have no end” is based on them being “limitless,” but this would make one part of the proposition invalid.
Some other scholars propose: We accept that there are entirely new beings that arise, like a divine forest. Their reasoning is: Just as a grove or thicket, even after repeated cutting and harvesting, shows new growth when old parts are destroyed, there is no end to the process. Therefore, we must accept that there are previously unseen new beings that arise—as briefly stated in the texts. In a brief teaching, it is said: When asked a question, the answer was given to the physician: “There are old beings, and there are new beings,” and so on. Thus, this must be accepted.
If this were not the case, things like a pile of sesame seeds, with no new additions and only subtraction, would surely come to an end. So, if we accept that there are new beings appearing for the first time, then this would mean accepting an initial beginning for birth and death. If we accept a beginning, that brings the fault of causelessness. And if we accept causelessness, then everything should exist without a cause. This is the fundamental intent of the great teacher.
In response to this, they say: Due to the seeds of karmic actions related to children, the good and bad dharmas, and the processes of the *alaya-vijnana* (storehouse consciousness) and the embryo, it is at this point that initial arising occurs. Once attachment happens, beings, based on their own good or bad actions, either enter the cycle of samsara or achieve nirvana. This accords well with the principle of dependent origination—namely, *saṃskāra-pratyayam vijñānam*, *vijñāna-pratyayam nāma-rupaṃ*, etc. Since there is this principle, how can you force the acceptance of new beings? The proponent then falls into the fault of an initial beginning for samsara.
Another scholar says: This is not a good answer. Why? If you allow new beings, there would be an increase. Because increase depends on decrease, the first being would be without a cause. If you say that this new being, not understanding the meaning of birth and death, is suddenly born due to the karmic force of other beings—if this is the case, then all beings now experiencing samsara, each moment transitioning to the next, would lead to an increase. By this reasoning, the theory of new beings would require accepting a first being, because increase depends on decrease. At all times, there would be many new beings arising. Their number would certainly increase, with each previous moment awaiting decrease. If so, then what can decrease would grow smaller, until it ends as a single entity.
But this first being, not relying on other karma, becomes the first—existing without a cause. This certainly cannot resolve the fault of causelessness. If you say there must be an increase, you incur this fault: having additions without consumption is the cause of increase, like a miser's possessions. However, beings do have a principle of decrease. Why? Each Buddha's manifestation (*buddhodbhava*) leads countless beings to nirvana, yet this doesn't match. The verse says:
佛出難遭故， 信教亦難逢，
生因既易得， 脫理相不同。
The Buddha's appearance is rarely met, And faith in his teachings is also hard to find. The causes of rebirth are easily obtained, Yet the path to liberation differs for each.
論曰：由佛出世實是難逢，如論中說：於初無數劫中已曾承事五个七十千佛，第二六个七十千佛，第三七个七十千佛。成佛資糧極難得故。如有頌云：
The Treatise says: The appearance of a Buddha in the world is truly rare. As the scriptures state: Over the first countless eons, he served five times seventy thousand Buddhas, in the second, six times seventy thousand Buddhas, and in the third, seven times seventy thousand Buddhas. The conditions for attaining Buddhahood are extremely difficult to fulfill, as the following verse says:
「無數百苦行， 無數善根生，
進無數長時， 斷無數煩障，
得一切種智， 淨除諸障惱，
成無上世尊， 如開篋觀寶。」
Through countless painful ascetic practices, countless roots of goodness were born.
For countless eons of practice, countless afflictions and hindrances were cut away.
Attaining all-knowing wisdom, pure of every obstacle and distress,
He became the peerless World-Honored One— like opening a casket to behold its treasure.
縱許或時逢如來出世，彼之所演清淨法律，敬信之者誠復難得，由彼信心於八暇處方能具足，然彼最是難得性故。然生起因是極易得，謂惑及業，此之因緣隨在何時多現前故。此之煩惱有三種緣，一隨眠未斷、二纏境現前、三於彼起不如理思，此為凡愚多所樂著。然而諸業但由能造屬著，因者亦非難得，或可有時而得解脫。欲將少費答彼新增，固亦未能免便成過，理不相應。頌曰：
Even if one were fortunate enough to encounter a Buddha appearing in the world, it would still be extremely rare to find someone who truly believes in and respects the pure Dharma and precepts that he teaches. Such faith is what enables one to attain the eight freedoms and endowments, yet these are the most difficult to obtain.
However, the causes for rebirth in samsara are very easy to come by: namely, afflictions and karma. Their conditions are present at all times. The afflictions have three types of conditions: (1) the latent tendencies have not been eradicated, (2) the object that triggers them appears, and (3) one engages in improper mental attention toward that object. Ordinary, foolish beings are strongly attached to these.
Furthermore, karma is easily produced simply by engaging in actions under the influence of these conditions. At times, liberation may be possible, but to pay back the debts incurred through such actions with minimal effort—without thereby avoiding wrongdoing—is logically inconsistent.
Thus, the verse says:
器界無增數， 容成有減時，
生死既無初， 此應成大迮。
論曰：若容有新，生應流至，此由非器世界，如有情世界而有增理。橫竪世界安布定數容有減時，如劫壞時，有界空故。如有說云：猶如天雨注，若伊沙無間無缺從空注墮。如是東方無間無缺，有諸世界或成或壞，如是等。然非有情新生新長有其限齊。然而薩埵增多數無窮極，理不相容，更互逼迫受迮苦耶？今更設問新生論者，所許未曾有情忽起，藉餘業力識乃得生，為是熏耶、為不熏耶？若言熏者，從其屬著新生，識熏便成體，是一多過起。凡論熏習，須共雜染及清淨法同生同滅，依止此已作彼生因。非彼有情先有生因，令彼二法可共生滅，依止此已作彼生因耶？然而能為屬著者，識與前二法同生同滅，為彼生因，頗無違失。若爾，最初識許熏習，其屬著者如前剎那，是此因故，次後剎那亦應如是。若異此者，熏習之法理不成故。由斯道理，其父用功而得解脫、或復多聞，子不施勞應同其父。或時如子，父亦應然。如斯等類過失轉多，悉皆招得。
若言不由熏，多種功能自起。若轉救云：為無染淨，同生滅故。依彼作因，有如前過。而今但取能屬著者，因緣合故為增上緣，為無根源彼得生起。此義固無不生果失。若爾，功能與果滅，猶若業功能。彼諸貪等所有功能，既酬果已並皆息滅，如異熟業自有功能，既生果已隨即淪喪。若異此者，便成無盡之愆。此亦如是。縱爾何失？以不許投餘種解脫，不勞勤故。貪等功能既其滅已，離此所有貪等功能，望自自果更不許其投新種子，由種斷故，縱不修習聖道，便成圓寂。此便符順善見天言，苟出私懷讚揚非法。如彼言曰：
「我觀群眾類， 髴心并髴身，
離諸歡樂欲， 別求除苦因。
但須耽妙樂， 何勞作餘見？
即將貪染心， 便招涅槃理。」
轉復生過，業無用故。如略詮云：有三種福業事，所謂施性、戒性、修性。於此發起勤勞修習，誠無用耶。何故如是？以和合功能果自起故。若諸福事將欲滅時，於阿賴耶識置異熟熏，後時此熏隨其自用，得助生因，和合當生未來異熟。爾者所用劬勞營彼福事，果不虛也。若也於先不修善業，藉彼屬者為其緣故，異熟功能忽然生起，從此能生現法，生後所有異熟苦身，勤修同前無用。
又二種業，思及思作，善、不善及以無記，如斯等類並成虛設。若言已後熏，及除阿陀那識最初剎那，乃至違緣未生已來，於自相續熏其貪等。如是便無所徵諸過。若如是者，先時熏亦爾，將其自熏習，此併盡成陳。若不爾者，如何與彼作生因耶？出世之智雖不曾得，但以墮在自相續中，所有似說二無性智，共許從此熏習之處而作生因。此聞之熏是極清淨，法界等流之體性故。法界即是如來法身我法二無性解，是法界所流果法謂法身。界即因也，是出世間諸法之界，謂能持彼熏習性故。及斷煩惱、所知二障所有餘習，名極清淨。其聞熏習是似彼果，彼為增上緣而得生起故，同彼體性故。如有說云：諸初發心菩提薩埵所有正聞熏習種子，雖曰世間，應知即是法身所攝，室羅縛迦鉢羝迦佛陀應知即是解脫身攝。是故定知，雖是世間，而能親作出世間心之種子也。說法之義似相分識，雖現是無，而從其章依其句義，顯彼所有相屬道理，示以一篇類諸，餘頌咸亦同耳。於此斷章，雖無支分為令解了，若爾何過？此併成陳，如於其後，先亦同然。但是墮在自相續中，以其貪等而熏著之。若如是者，即從先生種子而得生起，彼復從先，彼更由先。斯乃薩婆石揭盡從陳種而生，所執新生便成無氏。據此便能立有先世。
天授初眼識， 定從餘識來，
識性故應知， 猶如於後識。
假令滅定起， 心彼亦攝居，
宗內以理性， 同無不定過。
諸心心起法， 共許四緣生，
爾立最初心， 何謂等無間？
心心起法從四緣生，阿毘達磨理成決定。爾者汝之所許最初起心，何者是其同無間緣？亦非在他相續之中，所有心聚與自心聚為緣應理少多不同故，更有定理。諸生有染論自地煩惱，今汝所許生有染心，便非自地煩惱。縱於三世境，生理不能成。且非過去，不曾經故。亦非未來，由想曾經起願求故。復非現在，由其意識自在而起。便成無有、聾盲等故。復為五根及諸趣命根皆是異熟，汝便非異熟。奇異善談經，然而說云內五有熟養，故知眼等五根異熟性，成五趣亦是異熟體性，略詮為量故。有說具壽諸那洛迦，由其漏惱現前力故，遂便造作生捺洛迦業，令數增長具壽。謂身語意曲穢濁業，命終便於可惡賤處，令其異熟色受想行識被極煎煮。異熟生已，名那洛迦具壽。此中離彼法外，無別那洛迦而可得也。言彼法者，即是異熟生塞建陀義。此處聚言非無差別，此義即是遮其實我能馳諸趣，義准應知，意但攝取別異聚也。所云異熟生者，有情名體雖不差殊，為明有異熟者，謂五聚內善惡無記不是趣性、非是熟報。若彼亦是趣體者，即應現造生捺洛迦，諸不善業或數增長，此即應名那洛迦。為此諸識趣之體性，但是無覆無記，名為有情，於《對法》中亦如是說。又云：命根是毘播迦，思擇命根必定但唯是其異熟。然瑜伽論要立諸法皆異熟識，曾無一法越異熟性故。然汝新起有情論者，便成根等不是異熟。彼新有情生受後受所有諸業，先非有故，現法受業當爾之時弗容有故。由殊勝等因乃無故，亦復便成餘所作業令他招報故。奇異善談經者，將斯戲調。意欲道渠不善經論呈自胸臆，違阿笈摩故。
手杖論一卷