Madhyamaka Treatise (Zhong Lun), Fascicle One

若共若不共，是事皆不然。」

or both or neither, these matters are all not right."

如是推求過去世中邪見有、無、亦有亦無、非有非無，是諸邪見，先說因緣過故，是皆不然。

Thus, in seeking the wrong views of past lives, that there is, is not, both is and is not, neither is nor is not, these wrong views, because of the faults of causes and conditions explained earlier, are all not right.

「我於未來世，為作為不作？

"In future lives, will I be made or not made?

如是之見者，皆同過去世。」

Such views are all the same as for past lives."

我於未來世中，為作為不作？如是四句，如過去世中過咎，應在此中說。復次：

In future lives, will I be made or not made? These four phrases are like the faults for past lives, and should be explained here. Moreover:

「若天即是人，則墮於常邊；

"If a god is the same as a human, one falls into the extreme of permanence;

天則為無生，常法不生故。」

a god would then become unborn, because a permanent dharma is not born."

若天即是人，是則為常。若天不生人中，云何名為人？常法不生故。常亦不然。復次：

If a god is the same as a human, this becomes permanence. If a god is not born among humans, how can he be called a human? Because a permanent dharma is not born. Permanence is also wrong. Moreover:

「若天異於人，是即為無常；

"If a god differs from a human, this becomes impermanence;

若天異人者，是則無相續。」

if a god differs from a human, there is no continuity."

若天與人異則為無常，無常則為斷滅等過，如先說過。若天與人異則無相續，若有相續不得言異。復次：

If a god and a human are different, this becomes impermanence, and impermanence has the faults of annihilation and so on, like the faults explained earlier. If a god and a human are different, there is no continuity; if there is continuity, one cannot say they are different. Moreover:

「若半天半人，則墮於二邊，

"If half god and half human, one falls into both extremes,

常及於無常，是事則不然。」

permanence and impermanence, and this is not right."

若眾生半身是天、半身是人，若爾則有常無常。半天是常、半人是無常，但是事不然。何以故？一身有二相過故。復次：

If a being were half god in body and half human, then there would be permanence and impermanence: the half god permanent and the half human impermanent. But this is wrong. Why? Because of the fault of one body having two characteristics. Moreover:

「若常及無常，是二俱成者，

"If both permanence and impermanence could be established,

如是則應成，非常非無常。」

then neither permanence nor impermanence should be established."

若常無常二俱成者，然後成非常非無常，與常無常相違故。今實常無常不成，是故非常非無常亦不成。復次今生死無始，是亦不然。何以故？

Only if permanence and impermanence could both be established could neither permanence nor impermanence then be established, because it contradicts permanence and impermanence. Now truly neither permanence nor impermanence is established, so neither permanence nor impermanence is also not established. Moreover, to say now that birth and death have no beginning is also wrong. Why?

「法若定有來，及定有去者，

"If a dharma definitely had a place it came from, and definitely had a place it went to,

生死則無始，而實無此事。」

birth and death would have no beginning, but truly there is no such thing."

法若決定有所從來、有所從去者，生死則應無始。是法以智慧推求，不得有所從來、有所從去。是故生死無始，是事不然。復次：

If a dharma definitely had a place it came from and a place it went to, birth and death would have no beginning. When this dharma is sought with wisdom, no place it came from or went to can be found. So that birth and death have no beginning is wrong. Moreover:

「今若無有常，云何有無常，

"If now there is no permanence, how could there be impermanence,

亦常亦無常，非常非無常？」

both permanent and impermanent, neither permanent nor impermanent?"

若爾者，以智慧推求，無法可得常者，誰當有無常？因常有無常故。若二俱無者，云何有亦有常亦無常？若無有常無常，云何有非有常非無常？因亦有常亦無常故，有非有常非無常。是故依止過去世，常等四句不可得。有邊無邊等四句，依止未來世，是事不可得，今當說。何以故？

If this is so, then searching with wisdom, no dharma can be found to be permanent, so who could have impermanence? Because impermanence depends on permanence. If both do not exist, how can there be both permanent and impermanent? If there is no permanent-and-impermanent, how can there be neither permanent nor impermanent? Because it depends on both permanent and impermanent that there is neither permanent nor impermanent. So the four alternatives of permanence and so on, resting on the past, cannot be found. The four alternatives of finite, infinite and so on rest on the future; this cannot be found either, and will now be discussed. Why?

「若世間有邊，云何有後世？

"If the world is finite, how can there be a later world?

若世間無邊，云何有後世？」

If the world is infinite, how can there be a later world?"

若世間有邊，不應有後世，而今實有後世，是故世間有邊不然。若世間無邊，亦不應有後世，而實有後世，是故世間無邊亦不然。復次是二邊不可得。何以故？

If the world is finite, there should be no later world, yet in fact there is a later world, so the world being finite is wrong. If the world is infinite, there should also be no later world, yet in fact there is a later world, so the world being infinite is also wrong. Moreover, these two extremes cannot be found. Why?

「五陰常相續，猶如燈火炎；

"The five aggregates continue in succession, like the flame of a lamp;

以是故世間，不應邊無邊。」

Because of this, one should not speak of the world as finite or infinite."

從五陰復生五陰，是五陰次第相續，如眾緣和合有燈炎。若眾緣不盡，燈則不滅，若盡則滅。是故不得說世間有邊無邊。復次：

From the five aggregates arise further five aggregates; these five aggregates continue in succession like a lamp flame that arises from the coming together of many conditions. If the many conditions are not exhausted, the lamp does not go out; if they are exhausted, it goes out. So one cannot say the world is finite or infinite. Furthermore:

「若先五陰壞，不因是五陰，

"If the earlier five aggregates are destroyed, and not relying on these five aggregates,

更生後五陰，世間則有邊。

The later five aggregates arise, the world would be finite.

若先陰不壞，亦不因是陰，

If the earlier aggregates are not destroyed, and also not relying on these aggregates,

而生後五陰，世間則無邊。」

The later five aggregates arise, the world would be infinite."

若先五陰壞，不因是五陰更生後五陰，如是則世間有邊。若先五陰滅已，更不生餘五陰，是名為邊，邊名末後身。若先五陰不壞，不因是五陰而生後五陰，世間則無邊，是則為常。而實不爾，是故世間無邊。是事不然。世間有二種：國土世間、眾生世間。此是眾生世間。復次如四百觀中說：

If the earlier five aggregates are destroyed, and later five aggregates arise without relying on these five aggregates, then the world is finite. If the earlier five aggregates cease and no other five aggregates arise, this is called the end; the end is called the final body. If the earlier five aggregates are not destroyed, and later five aggregates arise without relying on these aggregates, the world is infinite, and this becomes permanence. But in fact this is not so, so the world being infinite is wrong. There are two kinds of world: the world of lands and the world of beings. What is spoken of here is the world of beings. Moreover, as the Four Hundred Verses on Contemplation says:

「真法及說者，聽者難得故，

"The true Dharma, and one who teaches it and one who hears it, are hard to obtain,

如是則生死，非有邊無邊。」

So birth and death are neither finite nor infinite."

不得真法因緣故，生死往來無有邊。或時得聞真法得道故，不得言無邊。今當更破亦有邊亦無邊。

One cannot obtain the causes and conditions of the true Dharma, so going back and forth in birth and death has no end. At times one hears the true Dharma and attains the Way, so one cannot say it is infinite. Now both finite and infinite are to be refuted.

「若世半有邊，世間半無邊；

"If half of the world is finite, and half of the world is infinite,

是則亦有邊，亦無邊不然。」

Then it is both finite and infinite, which is not right."

若世間半有邊半無邊，則應是亦有邊亦無邊。若爾者，則一法二相，是事不然。何以故？

If half of the world is finite and half is infinite, it would be both finite and infinite. If so, one dharma would have two marks, which is wrong. Why?

「彼受五陰者，云何一分破？

"That person who receives the five aggregates, how could one part be destroyed

一分而不破，是事則不然。

And one part not destroyed; this is not right.

受亦復如是，云何一分破？

Receiving is also like this, how could one part be destroyed

一分而不破，是事亦不然。」

And one part not destroyed; this is also not right."

受五陰者，云何一分破、一分不破？一事不得亦常亦無常。受亦如是，云何一分破、一分不破？常無常二相過故。是故世間亦有邊亦無邊則不然。今當破非有邊非無邊見。

The person who receives the five aggregates, how could one part be destroyed and one part not destroyed? One thing cannot be both permanent and impermanent. Receiving is also like this: how could one part be destroyed and one part not? Because of the fault of the two marks of permanence and impermanence. So the world being both finite and infinite is wrong. Now the view of neither finite nor infinite is to be refuted.

「若亦有無邊，是二得成者，

"If both finite and infinite can be established,

非有非無邊，是則亦應成。」

Then neither finite nor infinite should also be established."

與有邊相違故有無邊，如長相違有短。與有無相違，則有亦有亦無。與亦有亦無相違故，則有非有非無。若亦有邊亦無邊定成者，應有非有邊非無邊。何以故？因相待故。上已破亦有邊亦無邊第三句，今云何當有非有邊非無邊？以無相待故。如是推求，依止未來世有邊等四見皆不可得。復次：

Because it is opposed to finite, there is infinite, as short exists because it is opposed to long. Because it is opposed to existence and non-existence, there is both existence and non-existence. Because it is opposed to both existence and non-existence, there is neither existence nor non-existence. If both finite and infinite were definitely established, there should be neither finite nor infinite. Why? Because of mutual dependence. Above, the third alternative, both finite and infinite, was refuted; how can there still be neither finite nor infinite? Because there is no mutual dependence. Inquiring in this way, the four views of finite and so on, resting on the future, are all unobtainable. Furthermore:

「一切法空故，世間常等見，

"All dharmas are empty, so views such as that the world is permanent,

何處於何時，誰起是諸見？」

Where, at what time, and by whom are these views produced?"

上以聲聞法破諸見，今此大乘法中說。諸法從本以來畢竟空性，如是空性法中無人無法，不應生邪見正見。處名土地，時名日月歲數，誰名為人？是名諸見體。若有常無常等決定見者，應當有人出生此見；破我故無人生是見。應有處所色法現見尚可破，何況時方！若有諸見者應有定實，若定則不應破。上來以種種因緣破，是故當知見無定體，云何得生？如偈說「何處於何時，誰起是諸見？」

Above, the views were refuted with the Hearer Dharma; now it is taught within the Great Vehicle Dharma. Dharmas are from the beginning ultimately of empty nature, and within such a Dharma of empty nature there is no person and no dharma, so wrong views and right views should not arise. Place is called land; time is called days, months and years; who is called a person. This is called the substance of views. If there were definite views of permanence, impermanence and so on, there should be a person who produces such a view; since the self has been refuted, there is no person who produces this view. There should be a place; things with form, directly visible before the eyes, can still be refuted, how much more time and direction! If there were views, there should be something definite and real; if definite, it should not be refuted. Above, it has been refuted with all kinds of reasons, so one should know that views have no definite substance; how could they arise? As the verse says: "Where, at what time, and by whom are these views produced?"

「瞿曇大聖主，憐愍說是法，

"Gautama, great holy lord, out of compassion taught this Dharma,

悉斷一切見，我今稽首禮。」

To cut off all views completely; I now bow my head in homage."

一切見者，略說則五見，廣說則六十二見，為斷是諸見故說法。大聖主瞿曇，是無量無邊不可思議智慧者，是故我稽首禮。

What are called all views: in brief they are the five views, and in detail the sixty-two views, and the Dharma was taught in order to cut them off. The great holy lord Gautama is a person of immeasurable, boundless and inconceivable wisdom, so I bow my head in homage.