Madhyamaka Treatise (Zhong Lun), Fascicle One
汝不解云何是空相？以何因緣說空？亦不解空義。不能如實知故，生如是疑難。復次：
You do not understand what the characteristic of emptiness is. On what causes and conditions does one speak of emptiness? And you do not understand the meaning of emptiness. Not knowing it as it really is, you give rise to such objections. Moreover:
「諸佛依二諦，為眾生說法：
"The Buddhas, relying on the two truths, teach the Dharma to beings:
一以世俗諦，二第一義諦。
the first is the conventional truth, and the second is the ultimate truth.
若人不能知，分別於二諦，
If a person cannot know and distinguish these two truths,
則於深佛法，不知真實義。」
then regarding the profound Buddha-Dharma he does not know the real meaning."
世俗諦者，一切法性空，而世間顛倒，故生虛妄法，於世間是實。諸賢聖真知顛倒性，故知一切法皆空無生，於聖人是第一義諦名為實。諸佛依是二諦，而為眾生說法。若人不能如實分別二諦，則於甚深佛法不知實義。若謂一切法不生是第一義諦，不須第二俗諦者，是亦不然。何以故？
What is called the conventional truth: all dharmas are empty by nature, but the world is inverted, and so false dharmas arise, and in the world this is regarded as real. The worthy and noble truly know the nature of inversion and so know that all dharmas are empty and unborn; for the noble this is the ultimate truth, called real. The Buddhas, relying on these two truths, teach the Dharma to beings. If a person cannot distinguish the two truths as they really are, he does not know the real meaning of the profound Buddha-Dharma. If one says that the non-arising of all dharmas is the ultimate truth and there is no need for a second, conventional truth, this too is wrong. Why?
「若不依俗諦，不得第一義；
"If one does not rely on the conventional truth, one cannot attain the ultimate meaning;
不得第一義，則不得涅槃。」
if one does not attain the ultimate meaning, one cannot attain nirvana."
第一義皆因言說，言說是世俗，是故若不依世俗，第一義則不可說。若不得第一義，云何得至涅槃？是故諸法雖無生，而有二諦。復次：
The ultimate meaning is entirely dependent on speech, and speech is conventional; so if one does not rely on the conventional, the ultimate meaning cannot be spoken. If one cannot attain the ultimate meaning, how can one reach nirvana? So although dharmas are unborn, there are the two truths. Moreover:
「不能正觀空，鈍根則自害，
"Not rightly contemplating emptiness, the dull-witted harm themselves,
如不善呪術，不善捉毒蛇。」
like one who does not use a spell well or does not seize a venomous snake well."
若人鈍根不善解空法，於空有失而生邪見。如為利捉毒蛇，不能善捉反為所害。又如呪術，欲有所作不能善成則還自害。鈍根觀空法亦如是。復次：
If a person is dull-witted and does not understand the doctrine of emptiness well, he finds fault with emptiness and gives rise to wrong views. It is like seizing a venomous snake for gain: unable to seize it well, he is instead harmed by it. It is also like a spell: wishing to accomplish something but unable to do it well, he instead harms himself. The dull-witted contemplating the doctrine of emptiness are likewise. Moreover:
「世尊知是法，甚深微妙相，
"The World-Honored One knew that this Dharma has a profound and subtle characteristic,
非鈍根所及，是故不欲說。」
which the dull-witted cannot reach, and so was unwilling to teach it."
世尊以法甚深微妙，非鈍根所解，是故不欲說。復次：
Because the Dharma is profound and subtle and cannot be understood by the dull-witted, the World-Honored One was unwilling to teach it. Moreover:
「汝謂我著空，而為我生過；
"You think that I cling to emptiness, and so you produce faults for me;
汝今所說過，於空則無有。」
the faults you now speak of do not exist in emptiness."
汝謂我著空故，為我生過。我所說性空，空亦復空，無如是過。復次：
You think that I cling to emptiness, and so you produce faults for me. The emptiness of nature I speak of is itself also empty, and has no such faults. Moreover:
「以有空義故，一切法得成；
"Because there is the meaning of emptiness, all dharmas can be established;
若無空義者，一切則不成。」
if there were no meaning of emptiness, nothing at all could be established."
以有空義故，一切世間、出世間法皆悉成就。若無空義，則皆不成就。復次：
Because there is the meaning of emptiness, all worldly and supramundane dharmas are accomplished. If there were no meaning of emptiness, none would be accomplished. Moreover:
「汝今自有過，而以迴向我，
"You yourself now have the fault, yet you turn it onto me,
如人乘馬者，自忘於所乘。」
like a person riding a horse who forgets the horse he is riding."
汝於有法中有過不能自覺，而於空中見過，如人乘馬而忘其所乘。何以故？
You have faults within the dharmas that exist yet cannot notice them yourself, and instead see faults in emptiness, like a person riding a horse who forgets the one he rides. Why?
「若汝見諸法，決定有性者，
"If you see that dharmas definitely have a nature,
即為見諸法，無因亦無緣。」
then you see that dharmas have no cause and no condition."
汝說諸法有定性。若爾者，則見諸法無因無緣。何以故？若法決定有性，則應不生不滅，如是法何用因緣？若諸法從因緣生，則無有性。是故諸法決定有性，則無因緣。若謂諸法決定住自性，是則不然。何以故？
You say that dharmas have a fixed nature. If so, you are seeing that dharmas have no cause and no condition. Why? If a dharma definitely has a nature, it should not arise or cease; what use would such a dharma have for causes and conditions? If dharmas arise from causes and conditions, they have no nature. So if dharmas definitely have a nature, there are no causes and conditions. If you say dharmas definitely abide in self-nature, that is wrong. Why?
「即為破因果，作作者作法，
"That would be to break cause and effect, doing, the doer and the act of doing,
亦復壞一切，萬物之生滅。」
and moreover to destroy the arising and ceasing of all things."
諸法有定性，則無因果等諸事。如偈說：
If dharmas have a fixed nature, there are no such matters as cause and effect. As the verse says:
「眾因緣生法，我說即是無，
"The dharmas that arise from many causes and conditions I say are empty,
亦為是假名，亦是中道義。
they are also a provisional name, and also the meaning of the middle way.
未曾有一法，不從因緣生，
There has never been a single dharma that does not arise from causes and conditions,
是故一切法，無不是空者。」
and so there is no dharma that is not empty."
眾因緣生法，我說即是空。何以故？眾緣具足和合而物生，是物屬眾因緣故無自性，無自性故空，空亦復空。但為引導眾生故，以假名說，離有無二邊，故名為中道。是法無性故不得言有，亦無空故不得言無。若法有性相，則不待眾緣而有，若不待眾緣則無法，是故無有不空法。汝上所說空法有過者，此過今還在汝。何以故？
The dharmas that arise from many causes and conditions I say are empty. Why? When many conditions are complete and come together, things arise; this thing belongs to the many causes and conditions, and so has no self-nature; because it has no self-nature, it is empty; and emptiness too is empty. Only to guide beings is it spoken of by a provisional name, leaving the two extremes of being and non-being, and so it is called the middle way. This dharma has no nature, so one cannot say it exists; nor is there emptiness, so one cannot say it does not exist. If a dharma had a characteristic of nature, it would exist without depending on many conditions; if it did not depend on many conditions, there would be no dharma. So there is no dharma that is not empty. The fault you spoke of above, that the doctrine of emptiness has faults, that fault is still on your side now. Why?
「若一切不空，則無有生滅，
"If everything were not empty, there would be no arising and ceasing,
如是則無有，四聖諦之法。」
and thus there would be no such thing as the Four Noble Truths."
若一切法各各有性不空者，則無有生滅。無生滅故，則無四聖諦法。何以故？
If all dharmas each had a nature and were not empty, there would be no arising and ceasing. Without arising and ceasing, there would be no dharma of the Four Noble Truths. Why?
「苦不從緣生，云何當有苦？
"If suffering did not arise from conditions, how could there be suffering?
無常是苦義，定性無無常。」
Impermanence is the meaning of suffering, and a fixed nature has no impermanence."
苦不從緣生故則無苦。何以故？經說無常是苦義。若苦有定性，云何有無常？以不捨自性故。復次：
If suffering did not arise from conditions, there would be no suffering. Why? The sutra says impermanence is the meaning of suffering. If suffering had a fixed nature, how could there still be impermanence? Because it does not give up its own nature. Moreover:
「若苦有定性，何故從集生？
"If suffering had a fixed nature, why would it arise from the origin?
是故無有集，以破空義故。」
So there would be no origin, because the meaning of emptiness would be broken."
若苦有定性者，則不應更生，先已有故。若爾者，則無集諦，以壞空義故。復次：
If suffering had a fixed nature, it should not arise again, because it already existed before. If so, there would be no truth of the origin, because the meaning of emptiness would have been destroyed. Moreover:
「苦若有定性，則不應有滅。
"If suffering had a fixed nature, there should be no cessation.
汝著定性故，即破於滅諦。」
If you cling to a fixed nature, you break the truth of cessation."
苦若有定性者，則不應滅。何以故？性則無滅故。復次：
If suffering had a fixed nature, it should not cease. Why? A nature would not cease. Moreover:
「苦若有定性，則無有修道；
"If suffering had a fixed nature, there would be no cultivation of the path;
若道可修習，即無有定性。」
if the path can be cultivated, there is no fixed nature."
法若定有，則無有修道。何以故？若法實者則是常，常則不可增益。若道可修，道則無有定性。復次：
If a dharma definitely exists, there is no cultivating the path. Why? If a dharma is real, it is permanent, and what is permanent cannot be augmented. If the path can be cultivated, the path has no fixed nature. Moreover:
「若無有苦諦，及無集滅諦，
"If there were no truth of suffering, and no truths of origin and cessation,
所可滅苦道，竟為何所至？」
to what would the path that can end suffering ultimately lead?"
諸法若先定有性，則無苦集滅諦。今滅苦道，竟為至何滅苦處？復次：
If dharmas earlier definitely had a nature, there would be no truths of suffering, origin and cessation. Now the path that ends suffering, to what place of ending suffering would it finally lead? Moreover:
「若苦定有性，先來所不見，
"If suffering definitely had a nature, it was never seen before,
於今云何見？其性不異故。」
so how is it seen now? Because its nature does not differ."
若先凡夫時不能見苦性，今亦不應見。何以故？不見性定故。復次：
If earlier, in the time of the ordinary person, one could not see the nature of suffering, one should not see it now either. Why? The nature of what was not seen is fixed. Moreover:
「如見苦不然，斷集及證滅，
"If seeing suffering is not right, so too cutting off the origin and realizing cessation,
修道及四果，是亦皆不然。」
cultivating the path and the four fruits, these too are all not right."
如苦諦性，先不見者後亦不應見。如是亦不應有斷集、證滅、修道。何以故？是集性先來不斷，今亦不應斷，性不可斷故。滅先來不證，今亦不應證，先來不證故。道先來不修，今亦不應修，先來不修故。是故四聖諦見斷證修四種行，皆不應有。四種行無故，四道果亦無。何以故？
Like the nature of the truth of suffering, what was not seen before should not be seen afterward. Thus there should also be no cutting off the origin, realizing cessation or cultivating the path. Why? The nature of this origin was never cut off before, and should not be cut off now, because a nature cannot be cut off. Cessation was never realized before, and should not be realized now, because it was not realized before. The path was never cultivated before, and should not be cultivated now, because it was not cultivated before. So the four practices of seeing, cutting off, realizing and cultivating the Four Noble Truths should not exist. Without the four practices, there are no four fruits of the path either. Why?
「是四道果性，先來不可得；
"The nature of these four fruits of the path could never be found before;