Madhyamaka Treatise (Zhong Lun), Fascicle One

若不因不淨，先無有淨，因何而說淨？是故無有淨。復次：

If not depending on the impure, there was no pure beforehand, by what is the pure called pure? So there is no pure. Furthermore:

「若無有淨者，何由而有貪？

"If there is no pure, from what could desire arise?

若無有不淨，何由而有恚？」

If there is no impure, from what could hatred arise?"

無淨不淨故，則不生貪恚。

With no pure and no impure, desire and hatred do not arise.

問曰：經說常等四顛倒。若無常中見常，是名顛倒；若無常中見無常，此非顛倒。餘三顛倒亦如是。有顛倒故，顛倒者亦應有，何故言都無？

The questioner says: The sutras speak of the four inversions beginning with permanence. If one sees permanence within the impermanent, this is called inversion; if one sees impermanence within the impermanent, this is not inversion. The other three inversions are likewise. Because there are inversions, there should also be those who invert; why do you say neither exists?

答曰：

The respondent says:

「於無常著常，是則名顛倒；

"Clinging to permanence in the impermanent is called inversion;

空中無有常，何處有常倒？」

in emptiness there is no permanence, so where is the inversion of permanence?"

若於無常中著常，名為顛倒。諸法性空中無有常，是中何處有常顛倒？餘三亦如是。復次：

If one clings to permanence within the impermanent, it is called inversion. Within the emptiness of nature of all dharmas there is no permanence, so where within this is there the inversion of permanence? The other three are likewise. Furthermore:

「若於無常中，著無常非倒；

"If one clings to impermanence within the impermanent, it is not inversion;

空中無無常，何有非顛倒？」

in emptiness there is no impermanence, so where is non-inversion?"

若著無常言是無常，不名為顛倒者，諸法性空中無無常，無常無故，誰為非顛倒？餘三亦如是。復次：

If one clings to impermanence and says this is impermanence, it is not called inversion: but within the emptiness of nature of all dharmas there is no impermanence; with no impermanence, who is non-inverted? The other three are likewise. Furthermore:

「可著著者著，及所用著法，

"The attachable, the one who attaches, the attaching, and the dharma of attaching used,

是皆寂滅相，云何而有著？」

these are all the mark of stillness; how can there still be attachment?"

可著名物，著者名作者，著名業，所用法名所用事，是皆性空寂滅相。如〈如來品〉中所說，是故無有著。復次：

The attachable is called the thing; the one who attaches is called the agent; attaching is called karma; the dharma used is called the thing used. These are all empty of nature and the mark of stillness. As explained in the chapter on the Tathagata, so there is no attachment. Furthermore:

「若無有著法，言邪是顛倒，

"If there is no dharma of attachment, to say the wrong is inversion,

言正不顛倒，誰有如是事？」

and to say the right is non-inversion, who has such matters?"

著名憶想分別此彼有無等。若無此著者，誰為邪顛倒？誰為正不顛倒？復次：

Attachment is called recollection and discrimination of this and that, being and non-being and so on. If there is no such attachment, who is the wrongly inverted? Who is the rightly non-inverted? Furthermore:

「有倒不生倒，無倒不生倒，

"One already inverted does not give rise to inversion, one not inverted does not give rise to inversion,

倒者不生倒，不倒亦不生。

the one who is inverting does not give rise to inversion, and the one not inverting does not either.

若於顛倒時，亦不生顛倒，

If at the very time of inversion, inversion also does not arise,

汝可自觀察，誰生於顛倒？」

you may observe for yourself: who gives rise to inversion?"

已顛倒者，則更不生顛倒，已顛倒故。不顛倒者亦不顛倒，無有顛倒故。顛倒時亦不顛倒，有二過故。汝今除憍慢心，善自觀察，誰為顛倒者？復次：

One already inverted gives rise to still no inversion, because he is already inverted. One not inverted also does not invert, because there is no inversion. At the very time of inverting, there is also no inversion, because there would be a double fault. Now set aside the proud mind and observe well for yourself: who is the inverted person? Furthermore:

「諸顛倒不生，云何有此義？

"If the inversions do not arise, how can this statement be established?

無有顛倒故，何有顛倒者？」

Since there is no inversion, where is the inverted person?"

顛倒種種因緣破故，墮在不生。彼貪著不生，謂不生是顛倒實相。是故偈說，云何名不生為顛倒？乃至無漏法尚不名為不生相，何況顛倒是不生相。顛倒無故，何有顛倒者？因顛倒有顛倒者。復次：

Inversion has been refuted by various causes and conditions and falls to non-arising. That side clings to non-arising and says non-arising is the true nature of inversion. So the verse says: how can non-arising be called inversion? Even undefiled dharmas are not called the mark of non-arising, much less inversion as the mark of non-arising. If inversion does not exist, where is the inverted person? Because there is inversion, there is the inverted person. Furthermore:

「若常我樂淨，而是實有者，

"If permanence, self, happiness and purity are real,

是常我樂淨，則非是顛倒。」

then these permanence, self, happiness and purity are not inversions."

若常我樂淨是四實有性者，是常我樂淨則非顛倒。何以故？定有實事故。云何言顛倒？若謂常我樂淨倒是四無者，無常苦無我不淨是四應實有，不名顛倒。顛倒相違故名不顛倒。是事不然。何以故？

If permanence, self, happiness and purity truly have nature, these permanence, self, happiness and purity are not inversions. Why? Because there is definitely a real thing. How can it be called inversion? If one says that the opposites of permanence, self, happiness and purity do not exist, then impermanence, suffering, no-self and impurity should truly exist and not be called non-inversion. Because it is called non-inversion by being opposed to inversion. This is wrong. Why?

「若常我樂淨，而實無有者；

"If permanence, self, happiness and purity truly do not exist;

無常苦不淨，是則亦應無。」

impermanence, suffering and impurity should also not exist."

若常我樂淨是四實無，無故無常等四事亦不應有。何以故？無相因待故。復次：

If permanence, self, happiness and purity truly do not exist, because they do not exist, the four things of impermanence and the rest should not exist either. Why? Because there is no mark of dependence on a counterpart. Furthermore:

「如是顛倒滅，無明則亦滅，

"Thus when inversions cease, ignorance also ceases,

以無明滅故，諸行等亦滅。」

and because ignorance has ceased, the formations and the rest also cease."

如是者，如其義。滅諸顛倒故，十二因緣根本無明亦滅，無明滅故三種行業乃至老死等皆滅。復次：

'Thus' means in accord with its meaning. When all inversions cease, ignorance, the root of the twelve links of dependent origination, also ceases; when ignorance ceases, the three kinds of formative karma, up to old age and death, all cease. Furthermore:

「若煩惱性實，而有所屬者，

"If the nature of the afflictions is real and they belong to someone,

云何當可斷？誰能斷其性？」

how can they be cut off? Who can cut off their nature?"

若諸煩惱即是顛倒而實有性者，云何可斷？誰能斷其性？若謂諸煩惱皆虛妄無性而可斷者，是亦不然。何以故？

If the afflictions are inversion and truly have a nature, how can they be cut off? Who can cut off their nature? If one says the afflictions are all false and without nature and so can be cut off, this too is wrong. Why?

「若煩惱虛妄，無性無屬者，

"If the afflictions are false, without nature and belonging to no one,

云何當可斷？誰能斷無性？」

how can they be cut off? Who can cut off what has no nature?"

若諸煩惱虛妄無性，則無所屬，云何可斷？誰能斷無性法？

If the afflictions are false and without nature, they belong to no one; how can they be cut off? Who can cut off a dharma that has no nature?

中論觀四諦品第二十四(四十偈)

The Middle Treatise, Chapter Twenty-Four: Examination of the Four Truths (forty verses)

問曰：破四顛倒，通達四諦，得四沙門果。

The questioner says: With the four inversions refuted, one penetrates the four truths and attains the four fruits of the shramana.

「若一切皆空，無生亦無滅，

"If everything is empty, with no arising and no ceasing,

如是則無有，四聖諦之法。

then there would be no such thing as the Four Noble Truths.

以無四諦故，見苦與斷集，

Because there are no Four Truths, there is no seeing suffering and cutting off its origin,

證滅及修道，如是事皆無。

realizing cessation and practicing the path; such things would not exist.

以是事無故，則無四道果；

Because these things do not exist, there are no fruits of the four paths;

無有四果故，得曏者亦無。

with no four fruits, there are also no persons who attain the fruits or approach the fruits.

若無八賢聖，則無有僧寶；

If there are no eight kinds of worthy and holy persons, there is no Sangha Jewel;

以無四諦故，亦無有法寶；

because there are no Four Truths, there is also no Dharma Jewel;

以無法僧寶，亦無有佛寶。

because there is no Dharma Jewel or Sangha Jewel, there is also no Buddha Jewel.

如是說空者，是則破三寶。」

One who speaks of emptiness in this way thereby destroys the Three Jewels."

若一切世間皆空無所有者，即應無生無滅。以無生無滅故，則無四聖諦。何以故？從集諦生苦諦，集諦是因、苦諦是果。滅苦集諦名為滅諦，能至滅諦名為道諦。道諦是因、滅諦是果。如是四諦有因有果，若無生無滅則無四諦。四諦無故，則無見苦、斷集、證滅、修道。見苦斷集證滅修道無故，則無四沙門果。四沙門果無故，則無四向四得者。若無此八賢聖，則無僧寶。又四聖諦無故，法寶亦無。若無法寶、僧寶者，云何有佛？得法名為佛，無法何有佛？汝說諸法皆空，則壞三寶。復次：

If all the world were empty and without anything, there should be no arising and no ceasing. Because there is no arising and ceasing, there would be no Four Noble Truths. Why? From the truth of the origin arises the truth of suffering; the origin is the cause and suffering is the result. The extinction of suffering and its origin is called the truth of cessation, and what can reach the truth of cessation is called the truth of the path. The path is the cause and cessation is the result. Thus the Four Truths have causes and results; if there is no arising and ceasing, there are no Four Truths. Without the Four Truths, there is no seeing suffering, cutting off the origin, realizing cessation and cultivating the path. Without seeing suffering, cutting off the origin, realizing cessation and cultivating the path, there are no four fruits of the shramana. Without the four fruits of the shramana, there are no persons of the four approaches and the four attainments. If there are no such eight worthy and noble ones, there is no Sangha Jewel. And if the Four Noble Truths do not exist, neither does the Dharma Jewel. If there are no Dharma Jewel and Sangha Jewel, how could there still be a Buddha? One who attains the Dharma is called Buddha; without the Dharma, where is the Buddha? You say all dharmas are empty, and so you destroy the Three Jewels. Moreover:

「空法壞因果，亦壞於罪福，

"The doctrine of emptiness destroys cause and effect, and also destroys sin and merit,

亦復悉毀壞，一切世俗法。」

and moreover wholly destroys all worldly dharmas."

若受空法者，則破罪福及罪福果報，亦破世俗法。有如是等諸過故，諸法不應空。

If one accepts the doctrine of emptiness, one breaks sin and merit and their retributions, and also breaks worldly dharmas. With such various faults, dharmas should not be empty.

答曰：

The respondent says:

「汝今實不能，知空空因緣，

"You now truly cannot know emptiness, the causes and conditions of emptiness,

及知於空義，是故自生惱。」

and the meaning of emptiness, and so you yourself give rise to distress."