yadi punar mahāmate hetulakṣaṇasaṃyuktaṃ nityācintyatā, tīrthakarāṇāṃ hetubhāvasvalakṣaṇabhāvābhāvāc chaśaviṣāṇatulyā mahāmate nityācintyatā, vāgvikalpamātrā ca mahāmate tīrthakarāṇāṃ prasajyate |
tat kasya hetoḥ? yaduta vāgvikalpamātraṃ hi mahāmate śaśaviṣāṇaṃ svahetulakṣaṇābhāvāt |
mama tu mahāmate nityācintyatā pratyātmāryādhigamalakṣaṇahetutvāt kṛtakabhāvābhāvavarjitatvān nityam,
(27,1) na bāhyabhāvābhāvanityānityānupramāṇān nityam |
yasya punar mahāmate bāhyābhāvān nityānumānān nityācintyatvān nityam, tasyā nityācintyatāyāḥ svahetulakṣaṇaṃ na jānīte |
pratyātmādhigamāryajñānagocaralakṣaṇaṃ bahirdhā te mahāmate asaṃkathyāḥ ||
大慧。若復諸(14)外道因相成常不思議。因自相性非性。同於(15)兔角。此常不思議但言説妄想。諸外道輩有(16)如是過。
所以者何。謂但言説妄想同於兔(17)角。自因相非分。
大慧。我常不思議。因自覺(18)得相故。離所作性非性故常。非外性非性(19)無常思量計常。
大慧。若復外性非性無常。思(20)量計常不思議常。
而彼不知常不思議自因(21)之相。
去得自覺聖智境界相遠。彼不應説。
If again, Mahāmati, the eternal-unthinkable of the philosophers is in conformity with the idea of a cause, what they regard as characteristic of a cause is a non-entity like the horns of a hare; and, Mahāmati, their eternal-unthinkable is no more than a verbal discrimination, in which, Mahāmati, the philosophers' fault consists.
Why? Because, Mahāmati, mere verbal discriminations are, indeed, the hare's horns, on account of their having no characteristic of a self-cause.
Mahāmati, moreover, my eternal-unthinkable is really eternal because it finds its cause in the exalted state of self-realisation, and because it has nothing to do with a creator, with being and non-being.
Its eternality is not derived from the reasoning which is based upon the external notion of being and non-being, of eternity and non-eternity.
If the eternal-unthinkable is eternal in consideration of the non-existence and eternality of external things, we can say of this kind of the eternal-unthinkable that the philosophers do not know what is meant by characteristically self-caused.
As they are outside the state of self-realisation attainable by noble wisdom, Mahāmati, their discourse is not to the point.