You are here: BP HOME > TLB > Nāgārjuna: Mūlamadhyamakakārikā > fulltext
Nāgārjuna: Mūlamadhyamakakārikā

Choose languages

Choose images, etc.

Choose languages
Choose display
  • Enable images
  • Enable footnotes
    • Show all footnotes
    • Minimize footnotes
DiacriticaDiacritica-helpSearch-help
ā ī ū ṛ ṝ ḷ
ḹ ’ ṃ ḥ ṅ ñ
ṭ ḍ ṇ ṣ ś ź
š č ǰ γ    
Note on the transliteration:
The transliteration system of the BP/TLB is based on the Unicode/UTF-8 system. However, there may be difficulties with some of the letters – particularly on PC/Windows-based systems, but not so much on the Mac. We have chosen the most accepted older and traditional systems of transliteration against, e.g, Wylie for Tibetan, since with Unicode it is possible, in Sanskrit and Tibetan, etc., to represent one sound with one letter in almost all the cases (excepting Sanskrit and Tibetan aspirated letters, and Tibetan tsa, tsha, dza). We thus do not use the Wylie system which widely employs two letters for one sound (ng, ny, sh, zh etc.).
 
Important:
We ask you in particular to note the use of the ’ apostrophe and not the ' representing the avagrāha in Sanskrit, and most important the ’a-chuṅ in Tibetan. On the Mac the ’ is Alt-M.
 
If you cannot find the letters on your key-board, you may click on the link "Diacritica" to access it for your search.
Choose specific texts..
Nāgārjuna: Mūlamadhyamakakārikā
    Click to Expand/Collapse Option Complete text
Click to Expand/Collapse OptionTitle
Click to Expand/Collapse OptionPreface
Click to Expand/Collapse OptionChapters I-V
Click to Expand/Collapse OptionChapters VI-X
Click to Expand/Collapse OptionChapters XI-XV
Click to Expand/Collapse OptionChapters XVI-XX
Click to Expand/Collapse OptionChapters XXI-XXV
Click to Expand/Collapse OptionChapters XXVI-XXVII
Click to Expand/Collapse OptionColophon
Back to library
  saṃskārāḥ saṃsaranti cen na nityāḥ saṃsaranti te |
saṃsaranti ca nānityāḥ sattve ’py eṣa samaḥ kramaḥ || 1 || 
中論觀縛解品第十六(十偈)  諸行往來者 常不應往來
無常亦不應 眾生亦復然 
  || gal te ’du byed ’khor (4)zhe na | | de dag rtag na mi ’khor te | |
mi rtag na yang ’khor mi ’gyur | | sems can la yang rim ’di mtshungs | | 
[Chapter] 16: An Analysis of Being Bound (bandhana) and Release (moksa) (bondage and release)  1. When conditioned elements (dispositions, conditioning?) continue to change (through rebirths?), they do not continue to change as eternal things (the same before and after).
Likewise they do not continue to change as non-eternal things (different before and after).
The arguments here is the same as for a living being. 
Investigation of Bondage and Freedom  If it is said that impulses are “samsara”, if they were permanent, they would not move around. Even if impermanent, they would not move around. Sentient beings too are similar in this respect. 
   
(5) 中論 觀縛解品第十六 十偈  (6)問曰。生死非都無根本。於中應有衆生往(7)來若諸行往來。汝以何因縁故。説衆生及(8)諸行盡空無有往來。答曰(9)諸行往來者 常不應往來(10)無常亦不應 衆生亦復然(11)諸行往來六道生死中者。爲常相往來。爲(12)無常相往來。二倶不然。若常相往來者。則(13)無生死相續。以決定故。自性住故。若以無(14)常往來者。亦無往來生死相續。以不決定(15)故。無自性故。若衆生往來者。亦有如是(16)過。 
   
   
   
pudgalaḥ saṃsarati cet skandhāyatanadhātuṣu |
pañcadhā mṛgyamāṇo ’sau nāsti kaḥ saṃsariṣyati || 2 || 
若眾生往來 陰界諸入中
五種求盡無 誰有往來者 
gal te gang zag ’khor zhe na | | phung po skye mched khams rnams la | |
de ni rnam pa lngas btsal na | | med na gang zhig ’khor bar ’gyur | | 
2. If the personality would change when it is sought five ways in the “groups” (skandha), “bases of sense perception” (ayatana), and the “irreducible elements” (dhatu),
Then it does not exist. Who [is it who] will change (i.e. transmigrate)? 
If it is said that persons “move around,” if they are non-existent when searched for in five aspects among the aggregates, sense fields and elements, what would move around? 
 
復次(17)若衆生往來 陰界諸入中(18)五種求盡無 誰有往來者(19)生死陰界入即是一義。若衆生於此陰界入(20)中往來者。是衆生於燃可燃品中。五種求(21)不可得。誰於陰界入中而有往來者。 
 
 
 
upādānād upādānaṃ saṃsaran vibhavo bhavet |
vibhavaś cānupādānaḥ kaḥ sa kiṃ saṃsariṣyati || 3 || 
若從身至身 往來即無身
若其無有身 則無有往來 
nye bar len nas nyer (5)len par | | ’khor na srid pa med par ’gyur | |
srid med nye bar len med na | | de gang ci zhig ’khor bar ’gyur | | 
3. Moving from “acquisition” (upadana) to “acquisition” would be “that which is without existence” (vibhava).
Who is he who is without existence and without acquisition? To what will he change (i.e. transmigrate)? 
If one moves around in having clung [to something] and then clinging [to something else], there would be no becoming. If there were no clinging and no becoming, who would move around? 
 
復次(22)若從身至身 往來即無身(23)若其無有身 則無有往來(24)若衆生往來。爲有身往來。爲無身往來。二(25)倶不然。何以故。若有身往來。從一身至一(26)身。如是則往來者無身。又若先已有身。不(21a1)應復從身至身。若先無身則無有。若無(2)有云何有生死往來。問曰。經説有涅槃滅(3)一切苦。是滅應諸行滅若衆生滅。答曰。二倶(4)不然。 
 
 
 
saṃskārāṇāṃ na nirvāṇaṃ kathaṃ cid upapadyate |
sattvasyāpi na nirvāṇaṃ kathaṃ cid upapadyate || 4 || 
諸行若滅者 是事終不然
眾生若滅者 是事亦不然 
’du byed mya ngan ’da’ bar ni | | ji lta bur yang mi ’thad do | |
sems can mya ngan ’da’ bar yang | | ji lta bur yang ’thad mi ’gyur | | 
4. The final cessation (nirvana) of the conditioned elements certainly is not possible at all.
Nor is the final cessation of even a living being possible at all. 
It is in no way feasible that impulses go beyond misery. And it is in no way feasible that living beings go beyond misery. 
 
何以故(5)諸行若滅者 是事終不然(6)衆生若滅者 是事亦不然(7)汝説若諸行滅若衆生滅。是事先已答。諸行(8)無有性。衆生亦種種推求生死往來不可(9)得。是故諸行不滅。衆生亦不滅。問曰。若爾(10)者則無縛無解。根本不可得故。 
 
 
 
na badhyante na mucyanta udayavyayadharmiṇaḥ |
saṃskārāḥ pūrvavat sattvo badhyate na na mucyate || 5 || 
諸行生滅相 不縛亦不解
眾生如先說 不縛亦不解 
skye ’jig chos can (6)’du byed rnams | | mi ’ching grol bar mi ’gyur te | |
snga ma bzhin du sems can yang | | mi ’ching grol bar mi ’gyur ro | | 
5. The conditioned elements, whose nature (dharma) is arising and destruction, neither are bound nor released.
Likewise a living being neither is bound nor released. 
Impulses that have the properties of being born and dying are not bound and will not be freed. In the same way as above living beings too are not bound and will not be freed. 
 
答曰(11)諸行生滅相 不縛亦不解(12)衆生如先説 不縛亦不解(13)汝謂諸行及衆生有縛解者。是事不然。諸(14)行念念生滅故。不應有縛解。衆生先説五(15)種推求不可得。云何有縛解。 
 
 
 
bandhanaṃ ced upādānaṃ sopādāno na badhyate |
badhyate nānupādānaḥ kim avastho ’tha badhyate || 6 || 
若身名為縛 有身則不縛
無身亦不縛 於何而有縛 
gal te nye bar len ’ching na | | nye bar len bcas ’ching mi ’gyur | |
nye bar len med mi ’ching ste | | gnas skabs gang zhig ’ching bar ’gyur | | 
6. If the acquisition (upadana) were the “binding,” that one [having] the acquisition is not bound;
Nor is that one not having the acquisition bound.
Then in what condition is he bound? 
If clinging binds, the one who has clinging would not be bound. And there would be no bondage without clinging. In what situation would there be bondage? 
 
復次(16)若身名爲縛 有身則不縛(17)無身亦不縛 於何而有縛(18)若謂五陰身名爲縛。若衆生先有五陰。則(19)不應縛。何以故。一人有二身故。無身亦不(20)應縛。何以故。若無身則無五陰。無五陰(21)則空。云何可縛。如是第三更無所縛。 
 
 
 
badhnīyād bandhanaṃ kāmaṃ bandhyāt pūrvaṃ bhaved yadi |
na cāsti tac cheṣam uktaṃ gamyamānagatāgataiḥ || 7 || 
若可縛先縛 則應縛可縛
而先實無縛 餘如去來答 
(7)gal te bcing bya’i snga rol na | | ’ching ba yod na ’ching la rag | |
de yang med de lhag ma ni | | song dang ma song bgom pas bstan | | 
7. Certainly if the “binding” would exist before “that which is bound,” then it must bind;
But that does not exist. The remaining [analysis] is stated in [the analysis of] “the present going to,” “that which has already gone to” and “that which has not yet gone to.” 
If binding existed prior to one who is bound, [that unbound person] would depend on binding. That too cannot be. The rest has been explained by the gone, the not-gone and the going. 
 
復次(22)若可縛先縛 則應縛可縛(23)而先實無縛 餘如去來答(24)若謂可縛先有縛。則應縛可縛。而實離可(25)縛先無縛。是故不得言衆生有縛。或言。(26)衆生是可縛。五陰是縛。或言。五陰中諸煩惱(27)是縛。餘五陰是可縛。是事不然。何以故。若(28)離五陰先有衆生者。則應以五陰縛衆(29)生。而實離五陰無別衆生。若離五陰別有(21b1)煩惱者則應以煩惱縛五陰。而實離五陰(2)無別煩惱。復次如去來品中説。已去不去。(3)未去不去。去時不去。如是未縛不縛。縛已(4)不縛。縛時不縛。復次亦無有解。 
 
 
 
baddho na mucyate tāvad abaddho naiva mucyate |
syātāṃ baddhe mucyamāne yugapad bandhamokṣaṇe || 8 || 
縛者無有解 無縛亦無解
縛時有解者 縛解則一時 
re zhig bcings pa mi grol te | | ma bcings pa yang grol mi ’gyur | |
bcings pa grol bzhin yin ’gyur na | | bcings dang grol ba dus gcig (9b1)’gyur | | 
8. Therefore, “that which is bound” is not released and “that which is not bound” is likewise not released.
If “that which is bound” were released, “being bound” and “release” would exist simultaneously. 
Those who are bound will not be free. And those who are not bound will not be free. If those who are bound become free, bondage and freedom would be simultaneous. 
 
何以故(5)縛者無有解 無縛亦無解(6)縛時有解者 縛解則一時(7)縛者無有解。何以故。已縛故。無縛亦無解。(8)何以故。無縛故。若謂縛時有解。則縛解一(9)時。是事不然。又縛解相違故。問曰。有人修(10)道現入涅槃得解脱。云何言無。 
 
 
 
nirvāsyāmy anupādāno nirvāṇaṃ me bhaviṣyati |
iti yeṣāṃ grahas teṣām upādānamahāgrahaḥ || 9 || 
若不受諸法 我當得涅槃
若人如是者 還為受所縛 
bdag ni len med mya ngan ’da’ | | myang ’das bdag gir ’gyur ro zhes | |
de ltar gang dag ’dzin de yi | | nyer len ’dzin pa chen po yin | | 
9. “I will be released without any acquisition.”
“Nirvana will be mine.”
Those who understand thus hold too much to “a holding on” [i.e., both to the acquisition of karma, and to a viewpoint]. 
“I, without clinging, am beyond misery. Nirvana is mine.” Those who grasp in that way have great grasping and clinging. 
 
答曰(11)若不受諸法 我當得涅槃(12)若人如是者 還爲受所縛(13)若人作是念。我離受得涅槃。是人即爲受(14)所縛。 
 
 
 
na nirvāṇasamāropo na saṃsārāpakarṣaṇam |
yatra kas tatra saṃsāro nirvāṇaṃ kiṃ vikalpyate || 10 || 
不離於生死 而別有涅槃
實相義如是 云何有分別 
gang la mya ngan ’das bskyed med | | ’khor ba bsal ba’ang yod min pa | |
de la ’khor ba ci zhig yin | | mya ngan ’das (2)pa’ang ci zhig brtag | | 
10. Where there is a super-imposing of nirvana [on something else], nor a removal of existence-in-flux,
What is the existence-in-flux there?
What nirvana is imagined? 
When nirvana is not born and samsara not eliminated, then what is samsara? And what is considered as nirvana? 
 
復次(15)不離於生死 而別有涅槃(16)實相義如是 云何有分別(17)諸法實相第一義中。不説離生死別有涅(18)槃。如經説。涅槃即生死。生死即涅槃。如是(19)諸法實相中。云何言是生死是涅槃 
 
 
 
bandhanamokṣaparīkṣā nāma ṣoḍaśamaṃ prakaraṇaṃ || 
 
bcings pa dang thar pa brtag pa zhes bya ba ste rab tu byed pa bcu drug pa’o || 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  ātmasaṃyamakaṃ cetaḥ parānugrāhakaṃ ca yat |
maitraṃ sa dharamas tad bījaṃ phalasya pretya ceha ca || 1 || 
中論觀業品第十七(三十三偈)  人能降伏心 利益於眾生
是名為慈善 二世果報種 
  bdag nyid legs par sdom pa dang | | gzhan la phan ’dogs byams sems gang | |
de chos de ni ’di gzhan du | | ’bras bu dag gi sa bon yin | | 
[Chapter] 17: An Analysis of Action (karma) and Its Product (phala) (action and its results)  1. The state of mind which is self-disciplined, being favorably disposed toward others,
And friendship: that is the dharma; that is the seed for the fruit now and after death. 
Investigation of Actions and Fruits  Restraining oneself well and loving thoughts that benefit others are the Dharma which is the seed of fruits here and elsewhere. 
   
(20) ＊中論 觀業品第十七 三十三偈  (21)問曰。汝雖種種破諸法。而業決定有。能令(22)一切衆生受果報。如經説。一切衆生皆隨(23)業而生。惡者入地獄。修福者生天。行道者(24)得涅槃。是故一切法不應空。所謂業者(25)人能降伏心 利益於衆生(26)是名爲慈善 二世果報種(27)人有三毒。爲惱他故生行。善者先自滅(28)惡。是故説降伏其心利益他人。利益他(29)者。行布施持戒忍辱等不惱衆生。是名利(21c1)益他。亦名慈善福徳。亦名今世後世樂果種(2)子。 
   
   
   
cetanā cetayitvā ca karmoktaṃ paramarṣiṇā |
tasyānekavidho bhedaḥ karmaṇaḥ parikīrtitaḥ || 2 || 
大聖說二業 思與從思生
是業別相中 種種分別說 
drang srong mchog gis las (3)rnams ni | | sems pa dang ni bsam par gsungs | |
las de bdag gi bye brag ni | | rnams pa du mar yongs su bsgrags | | 
2. The most perceptive seer [Buddha] has said that there is action (karma) as volition and as a result of having willed.
The variety of acts of that [action] has been explained in many ways. 
The great sage has taught all actions to be intention and what is intended. The specifics of those actions are well known to be of many kinds. 
 
復次(3)大聖説二業 思與從思生(4)是業別相中 種種分別説(5)大聖略説業有二種。一者思。二者從思生。(6)是二業如阿毘曇中廣説。 
 
 
 
tatra yac cetanety uktaṃ karma tan mānasaṃ smṛtam |
cetayitvā ca yat tūktaṃ tat tu kāyikavācikam || 3 || 
佛所說思者 所謂意業是
所從思生者 即是身口業 
de la las gang sems pa zhes | | gsungs pa de ni yi kyir ’dod | |
bsams pa zhes ni gang gsungs pa | | de ni lus dang ngag gir yin | | 
3. Thus, that action which is called “volition”: that is considered [by tradition] as mental;
But that action which is a result of having willed: that is considered [by tradition] as physical or verbal. 
In this respect action spoken of as “intention” is regarded as being that of mind. That spoken of as “what is intended” is regarded as being that of body and speech. 
 
(7)佛所説思者 所謂意業是(8)所從思生者 即是身口業(9)思是心數法。諸心數法中能發起有所作故(10)名業。因是思故起外身口業。雖因餘心心(11)數法有所作。但思爲所作本。故説思爲業。 
 
 
 
vāgviṣpando ’viratayo yāś cāvijñaptisaṃjñitāḥ |
avijñaptaya evānyāḥ smṛtā viratayas tathā || 4 || 
身業及口業 作與無作業
如是四事中 亦善亦不善 
(4)ngag dang bskyod dang mi spong ba’i | | rnam rig byed min zhes bya gang | |
spong ba’i rnam rig byed min pa | | gzhan dag kyang ni de bzhin ’dod | | 
4. Sound (1), gesture (2) and that which does not rest which is considered as unknown (3),
Also the other unknown which is considered to be at rest (4); 
Whatever (1) speech and (2) movements and (3) “unconscious not-letting-go,” (4) other kinds of unconscious letting-go are also regarded like that. 
 
(12)是業今當説相(13)身業及口業 作與無作業(14)如是四事中 亦善亦不善 
 
 
 
paribhogānvayaṃ puṇyam apuṇyaṃ ca tathāvidham |
cetanā ceti saptaite dharmāḥ karmāñjanāḥ smṛtāḥ || 5 || 
從用生福德 罪生亦如是
及思為七法 能了諸業相 
longs spyod las byung bsod nams dang | | bsod nams ma yin tshul de bzhin | |
sems pa dang ni chos de bdun | | las su (5)mngon par ’dod pa yin | | 
5. That which is pure as a result of enjoyment (5), that which is impure as a result of enjoyment (6),
And volition (7): these seven basic elements (dharma) are considered [by the tradition] as the modes of action. 
(5) Goodness that arises from enjoyment/use and in the same manner (6) what is not goodness,[and] (7) intention. These seven dharmas are clearly regarded as action. 
 
(15)從用生福徳 罪生亦如是(16)及思爲七法 能了諸業相(17)口業者四種口業。身業者。三種身業。是七種(18)業有二種差別。有作有無作。作時名作(19)業。作已常隨逐生名無作業。是二種有善不(20)善。不善名不止惡。善名止惡。復有從用生(21)福徳。如施主施受者。若受者受用。施主得(22)二種福。一從施生。二從用生。如人以箭射(23)人。若箭殺人有二種罪。一者從射生。二(22a1)者從殺生。若射不殺。射者但得射罪。無殺(2)罪。是故偈中説罪福從用生。如是名爲六(3)種業。第七名思。是七種即是分別業相。是(4)業有今世後世果報。是故決定有業有果(5)報故。諸法不應空。 
 
 
 
tiṣṭhaty ā pākakālāc cet karma tan nityatām iyāt |
niruddhaṃ cen niruddhaṃ sat kiṃ phalaṃ janayiṣyati || 6 || 
業住至受報 是業即為常
若滅即無業 云何生果報 
gal te smin pa’i dus bar du | | gnas na las de rtag par ’gyur | |
gal te ’gags na ’gags gyur pa | | ji ltar ’bras bu skye par ’gyur | | 
6. If an action [exists] by enduring to the time of its fulfillment, that [action] would be eternal.
If [an action] were stopped—being stopped, what will it produce? 
If the action remained until the time of ripening, it would become permanent. If it stopped, by having stopped, how could a fruit be born? 
 
答曰(6)業住至受報 是業即爲常(7)若滅即無業 云何生果報(8)業若住至受果報。即爲是常。是事不然。何(9)以故。業是生滅相。一念尚不住。何況至果(10)報。若謂業滅。滅則無。云何能生果報。 
 
 
 
yo ’ṅkuraprabhṛtir bījāt saṃtāno ’bhipravartate |
tataḥ phalam ṛte bījāt sa ca nābhipravartate || 7 || 
如芽等相續 皆從種子生
從是而生果 離種無相續 
myu gu la sogs rgyun gang ni | | sa bon las ni mngon par ’byung | |
de las ’bras bu sa bon ni | | (6)med na de yang ’byung mi ’gyur | | 
7. There is fruit (phala) when a process, a sprout, etc., starts from a seed;
But without a seed that [process] does not proceed. 
The continuum of sprouts and so on clearly emerges from seeds, and from that fruits. If there were no seeds, they too would not emerge. 
 
問曰(11)如芽等相續 皆從種子生(12)從是而生果 離種無相續 
 
 
 
bījāc ca yasmāt saṃtānaḥ saṃtānāc ca phalodbhavaḥ |
bījapūrvaṃ phalaṃ tasmān nocchinnaṃ nāpi śāśvatam || 8 || 
從種有相續 從相續有果
先種後有果 不斷亦不常 
gang phyir sa bon las rgyun dang | | rgyun las ’bras bu ’byung ’gyur zhing | |
las ni ’bras bu’i sngon ’gro ba | | de phyir chad min rtag ma yin | | 
8. Inasmuch as the process is dependent on a seed and the fruit is produced from the process,
The fruit, presupposing the seed, neither comes to an end nor is eternal. 
Because continuums are from seedsand fruits emerge from continuums and seeds precede fruits, therefore, there is no annihilation and no permanence. 
 
(13)從種有相續 從相續有果(14)先種後有果 不斷亦不常 
 
 
 
yas tasmāc cittasaṃtānaś cetaso ’bhipravartate |
tataḥ phalam ṛte cittāt sa ca nābhipravartate || 9 || 
如是從初心 心法相續生
從是而有果 離心無相續 
sems kyi rgyun ni gang yin pa | | sems las mngon par ’byung bar ’gyur | |
de las ’bras bu (7)sems lta zhig | med na de yang ’byung mi ’gyur | | 
9. There is a product (phala) when a mental process starts from a thoughts;
But without a thought that [process] does not proceed. 
The continuum of mind clearly emerges from mind, and from that fruits. If there were no mind, they too would not emerge. 
 
(15)如是從初心 心法相續生(16)從是而有果 離心無相續 
 
 
 
cittāc ca yasmāt saṃtānaḥ saṃtānāc ca phalodbhavaḥ |
karmapūrvaṃ phalaṃ tasmān nocchinnaṃ nāpi śāśvatam || 10 || 
從心有相續 從相續有果
先業後有果 不斷亦不常 
gang phyir sems las rgyun dang ni | | rgyun las ’bras bu ’byung ’gyur zhing | |
las ni ’bras bu’i sngon ’gro ba | | de phyir chad min rtag ma yin | | 
10. Inasmuch as the process is dependent on a thought and the product (phala) is produced from the process,
The product, presupposing the thought, neither comes to an end nor is eternal. 
Because continuums are from minds and fruits emerge from continuums and actions precede fruits, therefore, there is no annihilation and no permanence. 
 
(17)從心有相續 從相續有果(18)先業後有果 不斷亦不常(19)如從穀有芽。從芽有莖葉等相續。從是相(20)續而有果生。離種無相續生。是故從穀子(21)有相續。從相續有果。先種後有果。故不(22)斷亦不常。如穀種喩。業果亦如是。初心起(23)罪福。猶如穀種。因是心餘心心數法相續(24)生。乃至果報。先業後果故不斷亦不常。若(25)離業有果報。則有斷常。是善業因縁果報(26)者。 
 
 
 
dharmasya sādhanopāyāḥ śuklāḥ karmapathā daśa |
phalaṃ kāmaguṇāḥ pañca dharmasya pretya ceha ca || 11 || 
能成福德者 是十白業道
二世五欲樂 即是白業報 
dkar po’i las kyi lam bcu po | | chos sgrub pa yi thabs yin te | |
(10a1)chos kyi ’bras bu ’di gzhan du | | ’dod pa’i yon tan rnam lnga’o | | 
11. The ten pure “paths of action” are means for realizing the dharma.
And the five qualities of desired objects [i.e., desire to know the form, sound, odor, taste, and touch of existence] are fruits (phala) of the dharma both now and after death. 
The ten paths of white action are the means of practising Dharma. Here and elsewhere, the fruits of Dharma are the five kinds of sensual qualities. 
 
所謂(27)能成福徳者 是十白業道(28)二世五欲樂 即是白業報(29)白名善淨。成福徳因縁者。從是十白業道。(22b1)生不殺不盜不邪婬不妄語不兩舌不惡口(2)不無益語不嫉不恚不邪見。是名爲善。從身(3)口意生是果報者。得今世名利。後世天人(4)中貴處生。布施恭敬等雖有種種福徳。略説(5)則攝在十善道中。 
 
 
 
bahavaś ca mahāntaś ca doṣāḥ syur yadi kalpanā |
syād eṣā tena naivaiṣā kalpanātropapadyate || 12 || 
若如汝分別 其過則甚多
是故汝所說 於義則不然 
gal te brtag pa der ’gyur na | | nyes pa chen po mang por ’gyur | |
de lta bas na brtag pa de | | ’dir ni ’thad pa ma yin no | | 
12. There would be many great mistakes if that explanation [were accepted].
Therefore, that explanation is not possible. 
If it were as that investigation, many great mistakes would occur. Therefore, that investigation is not valid here. 
 
答曰(6)若如汝分別 其過則甚多(7)是故汝所説 於義則不然(8)若以業果報相續故。以穀子爲喩者。其過(9)甚多。但此中不廣説。汝説穀子喩者。是喩(10)不然。何以故。穀子有觸有形。可見有相(11)續。我思惟是事。尚未受此言。況心及業。無(12)觸無形不可見。生滅不住欲以相續。是(13)事不然。復次從穀子有芽等相續者。爲滅(14)已相續。爲不滅相續。若穀子滅已相續者。(15)則爲無因。若穀子不滅而相續者。從是穀(16)子常生諸穀。若如是者。一穀子則生一切(17)世間穀。是事不然。是故業果報相續則不(18)然。 
 
 
 
imāṃ punaḥ pravakṣyāmi kalpanāṃ yātra yojyate |
buddhaiḥ pratyekabuddhaiś ca śrāvakaiś cānuvarṇitām || 17 || 
今當復更說 順業果報義
諸佛辟支佛 賢聖所稱歎 
sangs rgyas rnams dang rang rgyal dang | | nyan thos rnams (2)kyis gang gsungs pa’i | |
brtag pa gang zhig ’dir ’thad pa | | de ni rab tu brjod par bya | | 
13. In rebuttal I will explain the interpretation which can be made to fit [the facts],
That which is followed by the Buddha, the self-sufficient enlightened ones (pratyekabuddha) and the disciples [of Buddha]. 
I will fully declare the investigation which is taught by the Buddhas, Pratyekabuddhas and Sravakas, which is valid here. 
 
問曰(19)今當復更説 順業果報義(20)諸佛辟支佛 賢聖所稱歎 
 
 
 
pattraṃ yathā ’vipraṇāśas tatharṇam iva karma ca |
caturvidho dhātutaḥ sa prakṛtyāvyākṛtaś ca saḥ || 17 || 
不失法如券 業如負財物
此性則無記 分別有四種 
ji ltar dbang rgya de bzhin chung | | mi za las ni bu lon bzhin | |
de ni khams las rnam pa bzhi | | de yang rang bzhin lung ma bstan | | 
14. As “that which is imperishable” is like a credit [on an account statement], so an action (karma) is like a debt.
[The imperishable is] of four kinds in its elements (dhatu) [i.e., desire, form, non-form, and pure]; in its essential nature it cannot be analyzed. 
Just like a contract, irrevocable action is like a debt. In terms of realms, there are four types. Moreover, its nature is unspecified. 
 
(21)所謂(22)不失法如券 業如負財物(23)此性則無記 分別有四種 
 
 
 
prahāṇato na praheyo bhāvanāheya eva vā |
tasmād avipraṇāśena jāyate karmaṇāṃ phalam || 17 || 
見諦所不斷 但思惟所斷
以是不失法 諸業有果報 
spong bas spang ba ma yin te | (3)bsgom pas spang ba nyid kyang yin | |
de phyir chud mi za ba yis | | las kyi ’bras bu skyed par ’gyur | | 
15. [An imperishable force] is not destroyed qua destruction; rather it is destroyed according to spiritual discipline.
Therefore, the fruit of actions originates by the imperishable force. 
It is not let go of by letting go, but only let go of by cultivation. Therefore through irrevocability are the fruits of acts produced. 
 
(24)見諦所不斷 但思惟所斷(25)以是不失法 諸業有果報 
 
 
 
prahāṇataḥ praheyaḥ syāt karmaṇaḥ saṃkrameṇa vā |
yadi doṣāḥ prasajyeraṃs tatra karmavadhādayaḥ || 17 || 
若見諦所斷 而業至相似
則得破業等 如是之過咎 
gal te spong bas spang ba dang | | las ’pho ba yis ’jig ’gyur na | |
de la las ’jig la sogs pa’i | | skyon rnams su ni thal bar ’gyur | | 
16. If [the imperishable force] were that which is destroyed by [usual] destruction or by transference of action,
Fallacies [like] the destruction of action would logically result. 
If it perished through being let go of by letting go and the transcendence of the action, then faults would follow such as the perishing of actions. 
 
(26)若見諦所斷 而業至相似(27)則得破業等 如是之過咎 
 
 
 
sarveṣāṃ visabhāgānāṃ sabhāgānāṃ ca karmaṇām |
pratisaṃdhau sadhātūnām eka utpadyate tu saḥ || 17 || 
一切諸行業 相似不相似
一界初受身 爾時報獨生 
khams (4)mtshungs las ni cha mtshungs dang | | cha mi mtshungs pa thams cad kyi | |
de ni nying mtshams sbyor ba’i tshe | | gcig po kho na skye bar ’gyur | | 
17. At the moment of transition that [imperishable force]
Of all identical and different actions belonging to the same element (dhatu) originates. 
The very [irrevocability] of all actions in similar or dissimilar realms, that one alone is born when crossing the boundary [i.e. reborn]. 
 
(28)一切諸行業 相似不相似(29)一界初受身 爾時報獨生 
 
 
 
karmaṇaḥ karmaṇo dṛṣṭe dharma utpadyate tu saḥ |
dviprakārasya sarvasya vipakve ’pi ca tiṣṭhati || 18 || 
如是二種業 現世受果報
或言受報已 而業猶故在 
mthong ba’i chos la rnam gnyis po | | kun gyi las dang las kyi de | |
tha dad par ni skye ’gyur zhing | | rnam par smin kyang (5)gnas pa yin | | 
18. That [imperishable force] is the dharma, having arisen by one action after another in visible existence;
And it remains [constant] even in the development of all bifurcating action. 
In the visible world there are two kinds. Actions of all [types] and that [irrevocability] of actions are produced as different things and remain [so?] even on ripening. 
 
(22c1)如是二種業 現世受果報(2)或言受報已 而業猶故在 
 
 
 
phalavyatikramād vā sa maraṇād vā nirudhyate |
anāsravaṃ sāsravaṃ ca vibhāgaṃ tatra lakṣayet || 19 || 
若度果已滅 若死已而滅
於是中分別 有漏及無漏 
de ni ’bras bu ’pho ba dang | | shi bar gyur na ’gag par ’gyur | |
de yi rnam dbye zag med dang | | zag dang bcas par shes par bya | | 
19. That [imperishable force] is destroyed by death and by avoiding the product (phala) .
There the difference is characterized as impure and pure. 
When the fruit is transcendent and when one dies, that ceases. One should know its divisions to be without-corruption and with-corruption. 
 
(3)若度果已滅 若死已而滅(4)於是中分別 有漏及無漏(5)不失法者。當知如券。業者如取物。是不失(6)法。欲界繋色界繋無色界繋亦不繋。若分別(7)善不善無記中。但是無記。是無記義阿毘(8)曇中廣説。見諦所不斷。從一果至一果。於(9)中思惟所斷。是以諸業。以不失法故果生。(10)若見諦所斷而業至相似。則得破業過。是(11)事阿毘曇中廣説。復次不失法者。於一界諸(12)業相似不相似。初受身時果報獨生。於現在(13)身從業更生業。是業有二種。隨重而受(14)報。或有言。是業受報已業猶在。以不念念(15)滅故。若度果已滅。若死已而滅者。須陀洹(16)等度果已而滅。諸凡夫及阿羅漢死已而滅。(17)於此中分別有漏及無漏者。從須陀洹等(18)諸賢聖。有漏無漏等應分別。答曰。是義倶不(19)離斷常過。是故亦不應受。問曰。若爾者。則(20)無業果報。 
 
 
 
śūnyatā ca na cocchedaḥ saṃsāraś ca na śāśvatam |
karmaṇo ’vipraṇāśaś ca dharmo buddhena deśitaḥ || 20 || 
雖空亦不斷 雖有亦不常
業果報不失 是名佛所說 
stong pa nyid dang tshad med dang | | ’khor ba dang ni rtag pa min | |
las rnams chud mi za ba’i chos | | sangs (6)rgyas kyis ni bstan pa yin | | 
20. “Emptiness,” “no annihilation,” existence-in-flux, “non-eternity,”
And the imperishable reality of action: such was the teaching taught by the Buddha. 
Emptiness is not annihilation and samsara is not permanent. The dharma of the irrevocability of actions is taught by the Buddha. 
 
答曰(21)雖空亦不斷 雖有亦不常(22)業果報不失 是名佛所説(23)此論所説義。離於斷常。何以故。業畢竟空(24)寂滅相。自性離有何法可斷何法可失。顛(25)倒因縁故往來生死。亦不常。何以故。若法(26)從顛倒起。則是虚妄無實。無實故非常。復(27)次貪著顛倒不知實相故。言業不失。此是(28)佛所説。 
 
 
 
karma notpadyate kasmān niḥsvabhāvaṃ yatas tataḥ |
yasmāc ca tad anutpannaṃ na tasmād vipraṇaśyati || 21 || 
諸業本不生 以無定性故
諸業亦不滅 以其不生故 
gang phyir las ni skye ba med | | ’di ltar rang bzhin med de’i phyir | |
gang phyir de ni ma skyes pa | | de phyir chud zar mi ’gyur ro | | 
[Nagarjuna refutes the above arguments:]
21. Why does the action not originate?
Because it is without self-existence.
Since it does not originate, it does not perish. 
Because actions are not born, in this way they have no nature. Therefore, because they are not born, therefore they are irrevocable. 
 
復次(29)諸業本不生 以無定性故(23a1)諸業亦不滅 以其不生故 
 
 
 
karma svabhāvataś cet syāc chāśvataṃ syād asaṃśayam |
akṛtaṃ ca bhavet karma kriyate na hi śāśvatam || 22 || 
若業有性者 是則名為常
不作亦名業 常則不可作 
gal te las la rang bzhin yod | | rtag par ’gyur bar the tshom med | |
las ni byas pa ma yin ’gyur | | rtag la (7)bya ba med phyir ro | | 
22. If an action did exist as a self-existent thing, without a doubt, it would be eternal.
An action would be an unproduced thing; certainly, there is no eternal thing which is produced. 
If actions existed [by] nature, without doubt they would be permanent. Actions would not be done [by an agent] because what is permanent cannot be done. 
 
(2)若業有性者 是則名爲常(3)不作亦名業 常則不可作 
 
 
 
akṛtābhyāgamabhayaṃ syāt karmākṛtakaṃ yadi |
abrahmacaryavāsaś ca doṣastatra prasajyate || 23 || 
若有不作業 不作而有罪
不斷於梵行 而有不淨過 
ci ste las ni ma byas na | | ma byas pa dang phrad ’jigs ’gyur | |
tshangs spyod gnas pa ma yin pa’ang | | de la skyon du thal bar ’gyur | | 
23. If the action were not produced, then there could be the fear attaining something from “something not produced”;
Then the opposite to a saintly discipline would follow as a fallacy. 
If actions were not done [by anyone], one would fear meeting what [one] has not done. Also the fault would follow for that [person] of not dwelling in the pure life. 
 
(4)若有不作業 不作而有罪(5)不斷於梵行 而有不淨過 
 
 
 
vyavahārā virudhyante sarva eva na saṃśayaḥ |
puṇyapāpakṛtor naiva pravibhāgaś ca yujyate || 24 || 
是則破一切 世間語言法
作罪及作福 亦無有差別 
tha snyad thams cad nyid dang yang | | ’gal bar ’gyur bar the tshom med | |
bsod nams dang ni sdig byed pa’i (10b1)rnam pa dbye ba’ang ’thad mi ’gyur | | 
24. Then, undoubtedly, all daily affairs would be precluded.
And even the distinction between saints and sinners is not possible. 
All conventions also without doubt would be contradictory. Also the distinction between doing good and evil would not be valid. 
 
(6)是則破一切 世間語言法(7)作罪及作福 亦無有差別 
 
 
 
tad vipakvavipākaṃ ca punar eva vipakṣyati |
karma vyavasthitaṃ yasmāt tasmāt svābhāvikaṃ yadi || 25 || 
若言業決定 而自有性者
受於果報已 而應更復受 
de ni rnam smin smin ’gyur pa | | yang dang yang du rnam smin ’gyur | |
gal te rang bzhin yod na ni | | gang phyir las gnas de yi phyir | | 
25. Then an act whose development had taken place would develop again,
If an act, because it persists, exists through its own nature. 
[When] the ripening of that [action] has ripened it would ripen again and again, because if it existed [by] nature, it would [always] remain. 
 
(8)若言業決定 而自有性者(9)受於果報已 而應更復受 
 
 
 
karma kleśātmakaṃ cedaṃ te ca kleśā na tattvataḥ |
na cet te tattvataḥ kleśāḥ karma syāt tattvataḥ katham || 26 || 
若諸世間業 從於煩惱生
是煩惱非實 業當何有實 
las ’di nyon mongs dag nyid la | nyon mongs de dag yang dag min | |
gal te nyon mongs (2)yang dag min | | las ni yang dag ji ltar yin | | 
26. An action is that whose “self” (atman) is desire, and the desires do not really exist.
If these desires do not really exist, how would the action really exist? 
This action has the character of affliction and afflictions are not real. If affliction is not real, how can action be real? 
 
(10)若諸世間業 從於煩惱生(11)是煩惱非實 業當何有實(12)第一義中諸業不生。何以故。無性故。以不(13)生因縁故則不滅。非以常故不滅。若不爾(14)者。業性應決定有。若業決定有性。則爲是(15)常。若常則是不作業。何以故。常法不可作(16)故。復次若有不作業者。則他人作罪此人(17)受報。又他人斷梵行而此人有罪。則破世(18)俗法。若先有者。冬不應思爲春事。春不應(19)思爲夏事。有如是等過。復次作福及作罪(20)者。則無有別異。起布施持戒等業。名爲作(21)福。起殺盜等業。名爲作罪。若不作而有業。(22)則無有分別。復次是業若決定有性。則一(23)時受果報已。復應更受。是故汝説以不失(24)法故有業報。則有如是等過。復次若業從(25)煩惱起。是煩惱無有決定。但從憶想分別(26)有。若諸煩惱無實。業云何有實。何以故。(27)因無性故業亦無性。問曰。若諸煩惱及業(28)無性不實。今果報身現有。應是實。 
 
 
 
karma kleśāś ca dehānāṃ pratyayāḥ samudāhṛtāḥ |
karma kleśāś ca te śūnyā yadi deheṣu kā kathā || 27 || 
諸煩惱及業 是說身因緣
煩惱諸業空 何況於諸身 
las dang nyon mongs pa dag ni | | lus rnams kyi ni rkyen du bstan | |
gal te las dang nyon mongs pa | | de stong lus la ji ltar brjod | | 
27. Action and desire are declared to be the conditioning cause of the body.
If action and desire are empty, what need one say about “body”? 
Actions and afflictions are taught to be the conditions for bodies. If actions and afflictions are empty, how can one speak of bodies? 
 
答曰。(29)諸煩惱及業 是説身因縁(23b1)煩惱諸業空 何況於諸身(2)諸賢聖説。煩惱及業是身因縁。是中愛能潤(3)生。業能生上中下好醜貴賤等果報。今諸(4)煩惱及業。種種推求無有決定。何況諸身(5)有決定果。隨因縁故。問曰。汝雖種種因縁(6)破業及果報。而經説。有起業者。起業者有(7)故。有業有果報。 
 
 
 
avidyānivṛto jantus tṛṣṇāsaṃyojanaś ca saḥ |
sa bhoktā sa ca na kartur anyo na ca sa eva saḥ || 28 || 
無明之所蔽 愛結之所縛
而於本作者 不即亦不異 
ma rig bsgribs pa’i skye bo gang | | sred ldan de mi za ba po | |
de yang byed (3)las gzhan min zhing | | de nyid de yang ma yin no | | 
28. [An opponent tries to establish an identifiable entity by saying:]
The man shrouded in ignorance, and chained by craving (trsna)
Is one who seeks enjoyment. He is not different from the one who acts, nor identical to it. 
People who are obscured by ignorance, those with craving, are the consumers [of the fruits of action]. They are not other than those who do the action and they are also not those very ones. 
 
如説(8)無明之所蔽 愛結之所縛(9)而於本作者 不即亦不異(10)無始經中説。衆生爲無明所覆。愛結所縛。(11)於無始生死中。往來受種種苦樂。今受者(12)於先作者。不即是亦不異。若即是人作罪(13)受牛形。則人不作牛。牛不作人。若異則(14)失業果報墮於無因。無因則斷滅。是故(15)今受者於先作者。不即是亦不異。 
 
 
 
na pratyayasamutpannaṃ nāpratyayasamutthitam |
asti yasmād idaṃ karma tasmāt kartāpi nāsty ataḥ || 29 || 
業不從緣生 不從非緣生
是故則無有 能起於業者 
gang gi phyir na las ’di ni | | rkyen las byung ba ma yin zhing | |
rkyen min las byung yod min pa | | de phyir byed pa po yang med | | 
29. [Nagarjuna answers:]
Since action is not “originated presupposing the conditions” nor fails to arise from presupposing the conditions,
There is no one acting. 
Because the action does not emerge from conditions and does not emerge from non-conditions, therefore, the agent too does not exist. 
 
答曰(16)業不從縁生 不從非縁生(17)是故則無有 能起於業者 
 
 
 
karma cen nāsti kartā ca kutaḥ syāt karmajaṃ phalam |
asaty atha phale bhoktā kuta eva bhaviṣyati || 30 || 
無業無作者 何有業生果
若其無有果 何有受果者 
gal te las dang byed med na | | las skyes ’bras bu ga las yod | |
ci ste ’bras bu (4)yod min na | | za ba po lta ga la yod | | 
30. If there is no action, how could there be one who acts and the product of action?
And if there is no product, how can there be an enjoyer of the product? 
If neither the action nor the agent exists, where can there be a fruit of the action? If the fruit does not exist, where can the consumer exist? 
 
(18)無業無作者 何有業生果(19)若其無有果 何有受果者(20)若無業無作業者。何有從業生果報。若(21)無果報。云何有受果報者。業有三種。五陰(22)中假名人是作者。是業於善惡處生。名爲(23)果報。若起業者尚無。何況有業有果報及(24)受果報者。問曰。汝雖種種破業果報及起(25)業者。而今現見衆生作業受果報。是事云(26)何。 
 
 
 
yathā nirmitakaṃ śāstā nirmimīta rddhisaṃpadā |
nirmito nirmimītānyaṃ sa ca nirmitakaḥ punaḥ || 31 || 
如世尊神通 所作變化人
如是變化人 復變作化人 
ji ltar ston pas sprul pa ni | | rdzul ’phrul phun tshogs kyis sprul zhing | |
sprul pa de yang sprul pa na | | slar yang gzhan ni sprul pa ltar | | 
31. Just as a teacher, by his magical power, formed a magical form,
And this magical form formed again another magical form— 
Just as a teacher creates a creation by a wealth of magical powers, and just as if that creation too created, again another would be created, 
 
答曰(27)如世尊神通 所作變化人(28)如是變化人 復變作化人 
 
 
 
tathā nirmitakākāraḥ kartā yat karma tat kṛtam |
tadyathā nirmitenānyo nirmito nirmitas tathā || 32 || 
如初變化人 是名為作者
變化人所作 是則名為業 
de bzhin byed po de las gang | | byas pa’ang sprul pa’i rnam pa bzhin | |
dper na (5)sprul pas sprul gzhan zhig | | sprul pa mdzad pa de bzhin no | | 
32. Just so the “one who forms” is himself being formed magically; and the act performed by him
Is like a magical form being magically formed by another magical form. 
Like this, whatever action too done by that agent [is ]also like the aspect of a creation. It is just like, for example, a creation creating another creation. 
 
(29)如初變化人 是名爲作者(23c1)變化人所作 是則名爲業 
 
 
 
kleśāḥ karmāṇi dehāś ca kartāraś ca phalāni ca |
gandharvanagarākārā marīcisvapnasaṃnibhāḥ || 33 || 
諸煩惱及業 作者及果報
皆如幻與夢 如炎亦如嚮 
nyon mongs las dang lus rnams dang | | byed pa po dang ’bras bu dag | |
dri za’i grong khyer lta bu dang | | smig rgyu rmi lam ’dra ba yin | | 
33. Desires, actions, bodies, producers, and products
Are like a fairy castle, resembling a mirage, a dream. 
Afflictions, actions and bodies and agents and fruits are like a city of gandharvas, a mirage, a dream. 
 
(2)諸煩惱及業 作者及果報(3)皆如幻與夢 如炎亦如嚮(4)如佛神通力所作化人。是化人復化作化人。(5)如化人無有實事但可眼見。又化人口業(6)説法。身業布施等。是業雖無實而可眼見。(7)如是生死身作者及業。亦應如是知。諸煩(8)惱者。名爲三毒。分別有九十八使九結十纒(9)六垢等無量諸煩惱。業名爲身口意業。今世(10)後世分別有善不善無記。苦報樂報不苦不(11)樂報。現報業生報業後報業。如是等無量作(12)者。名爲能起諸煩惱業能受果報者。果報(13)名從善惡業生無記五陰。如是等諸業皆(14)空無性。如幻如夢。如炎如嚮 
 
 
 
karma[phala]parīkṣā nāma saptadaśamaṃ prakaraṇaṃ || 
 
las brtag pa zhes bya ba ste rab tu byed pa bcu bdun pa’o || 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  ātmā skandhā yadi bhaved udayavyayabhāg bhavet |
skandhebhyo ’nyo yadi bhaved bhaved askandhalakṣaṇaḥ || 1 || 
中論觀法品第十八(十二偈)  若我是五陰 我即為生滅
若我異五陰 則非五陰相 
  || (6)gal te phung po bdag yin na | | skye dang ’jig pa can du ’gyur | |
gal te phung po rnams las gzhan | | phung po’i mtshan nyid med par ’gyur | | 
[Chapter] 18: An Analysis of the Individual Self (ātma) (the self and phenomena)  1. If the individual self (ātma) were [identical to] the “groups” (skandha), then it would partake of origination and destruction.
If [the individual self] were different from the “groups,” then it would be without the characteristics of the “groups.” 
Investigation of Self and Things  If the aggregates were self, it would be possessed of arising and decaying. If it were other than the aggregates, it would not have the characteristics of the aggregates. 
   
(15) ＊中論 觀法品第十八 十二偈  (16)問曰。若諸法盡畢竟空無生無滅。是名諸法(17)實相者。云何入。答曰。滅我我所著故。得一(18)切法空。無我慧名爲入。問曰。云何知諸法(19)無我。答曰(20)若我是五陰 我即爲生滅(21)若我異五陰 則非五陰相 
   
   
   
ātmany asati cātmīyaṃ kuta eva bhaviṣyati |
nirmamo nirahaṃkāraḥ śamād ātmātmanīnayoḥ1 || 2 || 
若無有我者 何得有我所
滅我我所故 名得無我智 
bdag nyid yod pa ma yin na | | bdag gi yod par ga la ’gyur | |
bdag dang bdag gi zhi ba’i phyir | | ngar ’dzin nga yir (7)’dzin med ’gyur | | 
2. If the individual self does not exist, how then will there be something which is “my own”?
There is lack of possessiveness and no ego on account of the cessation of self and that which is “my own.” 
If the self did not exist, where could what is mine exist? In order to pacify self and what is mine, grasping I and grasping mine can exist no more. 
 
(22)若無有我者 何得有我所(23)滅我我所故 名得無我智 
 
 
 
nirmamo nirahaṃkāro yaś ca so ’pi na vidyate |
nirmamaṃ nirahaṃkāraṃ yaḥ paśyati na paśyati || 3 || 
得無我智者 是則名實觀
得無我智者 是人為希有 
ngar ’dzin nga yir ’dzin med gang | | de yang yod pa ma yin te | |
ngar ’dzin nga yir ’dzin med par | | gang gis mthong bas mi mthong ngo | | 
3. He who is without possessiveness and who has no ego — He, also, does not exist.
Whoever sees “he who is without possessiveness” or “he who has no ego” [really] does not see. 
The one who does not grasp at me and mine likewise does not exist. Whoever sees the one who does not grasp at me and mine does not see. 
 
(24)得無我智者 是則名實觀(25)得無我智者 是人爲希有 
 
 
 
mamety aham iti kṣīṇe bahirdhādhyātmam eva ca |
nirudhyata upādānaṃ tatkṣayāj janmanaḥ kṣayaḥ || 4 || 
內外我我所 盡滅無有故
諸受即為滅 受滅則身滅 
nang dang phyi rol nyid dag la | | bdag dang bdag gi snyam zad na | |
nye bar len pa ’gag ’gyur zhing | | de zad (11a1)pas na skye ba zad | | 
4. When “I” and “mine” have stopped, then also there is not an outside nor an inner self.
The “acquiring” [of karma] (upadana) is stopped; on account of that destruction, there is destruction of verse existence. 
When one ceases thinking of inner and outer things as self and mine, clinging will come to a stop. Through that ceasing, birth will cease. 
 
(26)内外我我所 盡滅無有故(27)諸受即爲滅 受滅則身滅 
 
 
 
karmakleśakṣayān mokṣaḥ karmakleśā vikalpataḥ |
te prapañcāt prapañcas tu śūnyatāyāṃ nirudhyate || 5 || 
業煩惱滅故 名之為解脫
業煩惱非實 入空戲論滅 
las dang nyon mongs zad pas thar | | las dang nyon mongs rnam rtog las | |
de dag spros las spros pa ni | | stong pa nyid kyis ’gag par ’gyur | | 
5. On account of the destruction of the pains (klesa) of action there is release for pains of action exist for him who constructs them.
These pains result from phenomenal extension (prapanca); but this phenomenal extension comes to a stop by emptiness. 
Through the ceasing of action and affliction, there is freedom. Action and affliction [come] from thoughts and they from fixations. Fixations are stopped by emptiness. 
 
(28)業煩惱滅故 名之爲解脱(29)業煩惱非實 入空戲論滅 
 
 
 
ātmety api prajñapitam anātmety api deśitam |
buddhair nātmā na cānātmā kaścid ity api deśitam || 6 || 
諸佛或說我 或說於無我
諸法實相中 無我無非我 
bdag go zhes kyang btags gyur cing | | bdag med ces kyang bstan (2)par gyur | |
sangs rgyas rnams kyis bdag dang ni | | bdag med ’ga’ med ces kyang bstan | | 
6. There is the teaching of "individual self" (ātma), and the teaching of "non-individual self" (anātma);
But neither "individual self" nor "non-individual self" whatever has been taught by the Buddhas. 
It is said that “there is a self,” but “non-self” too is taught. The buddhas also teach there is nothing which is “neither self nor non-self.” 
 
(24a1)諸佛或説我 或説於無我(2)諸法實相中 無我無非我 
 
 
 
nivṛttam abhidhātavyaṃ nivṛttaś cittagocaraḥ |
anutpannāniruddhā hi nirvāṇam iva dharmatā || 7 || 
諸法實相者 心行言語斷
無生亦無滅 寂滅如涅槃 
brjod par bya ba ldog pa ste | | sems kyi spyod yul ldog pas so | |
ma skyes pa dang ma ’gags pa | | chos nyid mya ngan ’das dang mtshungs | | 
7. When the domain of thought has been dissipated, “that which can be stated” is dissipated.
Those things which are unoriginated and not terminated, like nirvana, constitute the Truth (dharmata). 
That to which language refers is denied, because an object experienced by the mind is denied. The unborn and unceasing nature of reality is comparable to nirvana. 
 
(3)諸法實相者 心行言語斷(4)無生亦無滅 寂滅如涅槃 
 
 
 
sarvaṃ tathyaṃ na vā tathyaṃ tathyaṃ cātathyam eva ca |
naivātathyaṃ naiva tathyam etad buddhānuśāsanam2 || 8 || 
一切實非實 亦實亦非實
非實非非實 是名諸佛法 
thams cad (3)yang dag yang dag min | | yang dag yang dag ma yin nyid | |
yang dag min min yang dag min | | de ni sangs rgyas rjes bstan pa’o | | 
8. Everything is “actual” (tathyam) or “not-actual,” or both “acts actual-and-not-actual,”
Or “neither-actual-nor-not-actual”:
This is the teaching of the Buddha. 
Everything is real, not real; both real and not real; neither not real nor real: this is the teaching of the Buddha. 
 
(5)一切實非實 亦實亦非實(6)非實非非實 是名諸佛法 
 
 
 
aparapratyayaṃ śāntaṃ prapañcair aprapañcitam |
nirvikalpam anānārtham etat tattvasya lakṣaṇam || 9 || 
自知不隨他 寂滅無戲論
無異無分別 是則名實相 
gzhan las shes min zhi ba dang | | spros pa rnams kyis ma spros pa | |
rnam rtog med don tha dad med | | de ni de nyid (4)mtshan nyid do | | 
9. “Not caused by something else,” “peaceful,” “not elaborated by discursive thought,”
“Indeterminate,” “undifferentiated”: such are the characteristics of true reality (tattva). 
Not known through others, peaceful, not fixed by fixations, without conceptual thought, without differentiation: these are the characteristics of suchness. 
 
(7)自知不隨他 寂滅無戲論(8)無異無分別 是則名實相 
 
 
 
pratītya yad yad bhavati na hi tāvat tad eva tat |
na cānyad api tat tasmān nocchinnaṃ nāpi śāśvatam || 10 || 
若法從緣生 不即不異因
是故名實相 不斷亦不常 
gang la brten te gang ’byung ba | | de ni re zhig de nyid min | |
de las gzhan pa’ang ma yin phyir | | de phyir chad min rtag ma yin | | 
10. Whatever exists, being dependent [on something else], is certainly not identical to that [other thing],
Nor is a thing different from that; therefore, it is neither destroyed nor eternal. 
Whatever arises dependent on something else is at that time neither that very thing nor other than it. Hence it is neither severed nor permanent. 
 
(9)若法從縁生 不即不異因(10)是故名實相 不斷亦不常 
 
 
 
anekārtham anānārtham anucchedam aśāśvatam |
etat tal lokanāthānāṃ buddhānāṃ śāsanāmṛtam || 11 || 
不一亦不異 不常亦不斷
是名諸世尊 教化甘露味 
sangs rgyas ’jig rten mgon rnams kyi | | bstan pa bdud rtsir gyur pa de | |
don gcig ma yin tha dad min | (5)chad pa ma yin rtag ma yin | | 
11. The immortal essence of the teaching of the Buddhas, the lords of the world, is
Without singleness or multiplicity; it is not destroyed nor is it eternal. 
That ambrosial teaching of the buddhas, those guardians of the world, is neither the same nor different, neither severed nor permanent. 
 
(11)不一亦不異 不常亦不斷(12)是名諸世尊 教化甘露味 
 
 
 
saṃbuddhānām anutpāde śrāvakāṇāṃ punaḥ kṣaye |
jñānaṃ pratyekabuddhānām asaṃsargāt pravartate || 12 || 
若佛不出世 佛法已滅盡
諸辟支佛智 從於遠離生 
rdzogs sangs rgyas rnams ma byung zhing | | nyan thos rnams ni zad gyur kyang | |
rang sangs rgyas kyi ye shes ni | | ston pa med las rab tu skye | | 
12. If fully-developed Buddhas do not arise [in the world] and the disciples [of the Buddha] disappear,
Then, independently, the knowledge of the self-produced enlightened ones (pratyekabuddha) is produced. 
When perfect buddhas do not appear, and when their disciples have died out, the wisdom of the self-awakened ones will vividly arise without reliance. 
 
(13)若佛不出世 佛法已滅盡(14)諸辟支佛智 從於遠離生(15)有人説神。應有二種。若五陰即是神。若離(16)五陰有神。若五陰是神者神則生滅相。如(17)偈中説。若神是五陰即是生滅相。何以故。生(18)已壞敗故。以生滅相故。五陰是無常。如五(19)陰無常。生滅二法亦是無常。何以故。生滅(20)亦生已壞敗故無常。神若是五陰。五陰無常(21)故。神亦應無常生滅相。但是事不然。若離(22)五陰有神。神即無五陰相。如偈中説。若神(23)異五陰。則非五陰相。而離五陰更無有(24)法。若離五陰有法者。以何相何法而有。(25)若謂神如虚空離五陰而有者。是亦不(26)然。何以故。破六種品中已破。虚空無有法(27)名爲虚空。若謂以有信故有神。是事不(28)然。何以故。信有四種。一現事可信。二名比(29)知可信。如見煙知有火。三名譬喩可信。(24b1)如國無鋀石喩之如金。四名賢聖所説故(2)可信。如説有地獄有天有欝單曰。無(3)有見者。信聖人語故知。是神於一切信中(4)不可得。現事中亦無。比知中亦無。何以故。比(5)知。名先見故後比類而知。如人先見火有(6)煙。後但見煙則知有火。神義不然。誰能先(7)見神與五陰合。後見五陰知有神。若謂(8)有三種比知。一者如本。二者如殘。三者共(9)見。如本。名先見火有煙。今見煙知如本(10)有火。如殘。名如炊飯一粒熟知餘者皆熟。(11)共見。名如眼見人從此去到彼亦見其去。(12)日亦如是。從東方出至西方。雖不見去(13)以人有去相故。知日亦有去。如是苦樂(14)憎愛覺知等。亦應有所依。如見人民知必(15)依王。是事皆不然。何以故。共相信先見人(16)與去法合而至餘方。後見日到餘方故知(17)有去法。無有先見五陰與神合後見五(18)陰知有神。是故共相比知中亦無神。聖人(19)所説中亦無神。何以故。聖人所説。皆先眼見(20)而後説。又諸聖人説餘事可信故。當知説(21)地獄等亦可信。而神不爾。無有先見神而(22)後説者。是故於四信等諸信中。求神不可(23)得。求神不可得故無。是故離五陰無別神。(24)復次破根品中。見見者可見破故。神亦同破。(25)又眼見麁法尚不可得。何況虚妄憶想等而(26)有神。是故知無我。因有我故有我所。若(27)無我則無我所。修習八聖道分。滅我我所(28)因縁故。得無我無我所決定智慧(29)又無我無我所者。於第一義中亦不可得。無(24c1)我無我所者。能眞見諸法。凡夫人以我我(2)所障慧眼故。不能見實。今聖人無我我(3)所故。諸煩惱亦滅。諸煩惱滅故。能見諸法(4)實相。内外我我所滅故諸受亦滅。諸受滅故(5)無量後身皆亦滅。是名説無餘涅槃。問曰。(6)有餘涅槃云何。答曰。諸煩惱及業滅故。名心(7)得解脱。是諸煩惱業。皆從憶想分別生無(8)有實。諸憶想分別皆從戲論生。得諸法實(9)相畢竟空。諸戲論則滅。是名説有餘涅槃。(10)實相法如是。諸佛以一切智觀衆生故。種(11)種爲説。亦説有我亦説無我。若心未熟者。(12)未有涅槃分。不知畏罪。爲是等故説有(13)我。又有得道者。知諸法空但假名有我。(14)爲是等故説我無咎。又有布施持戒等福(15)徳。厭離生死苦惱畏涅槃永滅。是故佛爲(16)是等説無我。諸法但因縁和合。生時空生。(17)滅時空滅。是故説無我。但假名説有我。又(18)得道者。知無我不墮斷滅故説無我無(19)咎。是故偈中説。諸佛説有我亦説於無我。(20)若於眞實中不説我非我。問曰。若無我是(21)實。但以世俗故説有我。有何咎。答曰。因(22)破我法有無我。我決定不可得。何有無(23)我。若決定有無我。則是斷滅生於貪著。如(24)般若中説菩薩有我亦非行。無我亦非行。(25)問曰。若不説我非我空不空。佛法爲何所(26)説。答曰。佛説諸法實相。實相中無語言道。(27)滅諸心行。心以取相縁。生以先世業果報(28)故有。不能實見諸法。是故説心行滅。問曰。(29)若諸凡夫心不能見實。聖人心應能見實。(25a1)何故説一切心行滅。答曰。諸法實相即是(2)涅槃。涅槃名滅。是滅爲向涅槃故亦名爲(3)滅。若心是實。何用空等解脱門。諸禪定中。(4)何故以滅盡定爲第一。又亦終歸無餘涅(5)槃。是故當知。一切心行皆是虚妄。虚妄故(6)應滅。諸法實相者。出諸心數法。無生無滅(7)寂滅相。如涅槃。問曰經中説。諸法先來寂滅(8)相即是涅槃。何以言如涅槃。答曰。著法者。(9)分別法有二種。是世間是涅槃。説涅槃是(10)寂滅不説世間是寂滅。此論中説一切法(11)性空寂滅相。爲著法者不解故。以涅槃爲(12)喩。如汝説涅槃相空無相寂滅無戲論。一(13)切世間法亦如是(14)問曰。若佛不説我非我。諸心行滅。言語道(15)斷者。云何令人知諸法實相。答曰。諸佛無(16)量方便力。諸法無決定相。爲度衆生或説(17)一切實。或説一切不實。或説一切實不實。(18)或説一切非實非不實。一切實者。推求諸法(19)實性。皆入第一義平等一相。所謂無相。如(20)諸流異色異味入於大海則一色一味。一(21)切不實者。諸法未入實相時。各各分別觀(22)皆無有實。但衆縁合故有。一切實不實者。(23)衆生有三品有上中下。上者觀諸法相非(24)實非不實。中者觀諸法相一切實一切不實。(25)下者智力淺故。觀諸法相少實少不實。觀涅(26)槃無爲法不壞故實。觀生死有爲法虚僞故(27)不實。非實非不實者。爲破實不實故。説非(28)實非不實。問曰。佛於餘處。説離非有非無。(29)此中何以言非有非無是佛所説。答曰。餘處(25b1)爲破四種貪著故説。而此中於四句無戲(2)論。聞佛説則得道。是故言非實非不實。問(3)曰。知佛以是四句因縁説。又得諸法實相(4)者以何相可知。又實相云何。答曰。若能不(5)隨他。不隨他者。若外道雖現神力説是(6)道是非道。自信其心而不隨之。乃至變身(7)雖不知非佛。善解實相故心不可迴。此(8)中無法可取可捨故。名寂滅相。寂滅相故。(9)不爲戲論所戲論。戲論有二種。一者愛論。(10)二者見論。是中無此二戲論。二戲論無故。(11)無憶想分別。無別異相。是名實相。問曰。(12)若諸法盡空。將不墮斷滅耶。又不生不滅(13)或墮常耶。答曰不然。先説實相無戲論。心(14)相寂滅言語道斷。汝今貪著取相。於實相(15)法中見斷常過。得實相者。説諸法從衆(16)縁生。不即是因亦不異因。是故不斷不(17)常。若果異因則是斷。若不異因則是常。問(18)曰。若如是解有何等利。答曰。若行道者。能(19)通達如是義。則於一切法。不一不異不斷(20)不常。若能如是。即得滅諸煩惱戲論。得常(21)樂涅槃。是故説諸佛以甘露味教化。如世(22)間言得天甘露漿。則無老病死無諸衰惱。(23)此實相法是眞甘露味。佛説實相有三種。(24)若得諸法實相。滅諸煩惱。名爲聲聞法。若(25)生大悲發無上心。名爲大乘。若佛不出(26)世。無有佛法時。辟支佛因遠離生智。若(27)佛度衆生已。入無餘涅槃。遺法滅盡。先世(28)若有應得道者。少觀厭離因縁。獨入山(29)林遠離憒鬧得道。名辟支佛(25c1) 
 
 
 
ātmaparīkṣā nāmāṣṭadaśamaṃ prakaraṇaṃ || 
 
bdag dang chos brtag pa zhes bya ba ste rab tu byed pa bcwo [?] brgyad pa’o || 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  pratyutpanno ’nāgataś ca yady atītam apekṣya hi |
pratyutpanno ’nāgataś ca kāle ’tīte bhaviṣyataḥ || 1 || 
中論觀時品第十九(六偈)  若因過去時 有未來現在
未來及現在 應在過去時 
  || da (6)ltar byung dang ma ’ongs pa | | gal te ’das la ltos gyur na | |
da ltar byung dang ma ’ongs pa | | ’das pa’i dus na yod par ’gyur | | 
[Chapter] 19: An Analysis of Time (kala) (time)  1. If “the present” and “future” exist presupposing “the past,”
“The present” and “future” will exist in “the past.” 
Investigation of Time  If the present and the future were contingent on the past, then the present and the future would have existed in the past. 
   
中論<#0025_7/>觀時品第十九 六偈  (2)問曰。應有時以因待故成。因有過去時。(3)則有未來現在時。因現在時。有過去未來(4)時。因未來時。有過去現在時。上中下一異(5)等法。亦相因待故有。答曰(6)若因<#0025_8/>過去時 有<#0025_9/>未來<#0025_10/>現在(7)未來及現在 應在過去時(8)若因過去時。有未來現在時者。則過去時(9)中。應有未來現在時。何以故。隨所因處有(10)法成。是處應有是法。如因燈有明成。隨(11)有燈處應有明。如是因過去時。成未來(12)現在時者。則過去時中。應有未來現在時。(13)若過去時中。有未來現在時者。則三時盡(14)名過去時。何以故。未來現在時。在過去時(15)中故。若一切時盡過去者。則無未來現在(16)時。盡過去故。若無未來現在時。亦應無過(17)去時。何以故。過去時因未來現在時故。名(18)過去時。如因過去時成未來現在時。如是(19)亦應因未來現在時成過去時。今無未來(20)現在時故。過去時亦應無。是故先説。因過(21)去時成未來現在時。是事不然。若謂過去(22)時中無未來現在時。而因過去時成未來(23)現在時。是事不然。 
   
   
   
pratyutpanno ’nāgataś ca na stas tatra punar yadi |
pratyutpanno ’nāgataś ca syātāṃ katham apekṣya tam || 2 || 
若過去時中 無未來現在
未來現在時 云何因過去 
da ltar byung dang ma ’ongs pa | | gal te de na med gyur na | |
da ltar byung dang ma ’ongs pa | | ji ltar de la ltos par ’gyur | | 
2. If “the present” and “future” did not exist there [in “the past”],
How could “the present” and “future” exist presupposing that “past? 
If the present and future did not exist there, then how could the present and the future be contingent on it? 
 
何以故(24)若過去時中 無未來現在(25)未來現在時 云何因過去(26)若未來現在時。不在過去時中者。云何因(27)過去時。成未來現在時。何以故。若三時各異(28)相。不應相因待成。如瓶衣等物各自別成(29)不相因待。而今不因過去時。則未來現在(26a1)時不成。不因現在時。則過去未來時不成。(2)不因未來時。則過去現在時不成。汝先説(3)過去時中。雖無未來現在時。而因過去時。(4)成未來現在時者。是事不然。問曰。若不因(5)過去時。成未來現在時。而有何咎。 
 
 
 
anapekṣya punaḥ siddhir nātītaṃ vidyate tayoḥ |
pratyutpanno ’nāgataś ca tasmāt kālo na vidyate || 3 || 
不因過去時 則無未來時
亦無現在時 是故無二時 
’das (7)pa la ni ma ltos par | | de gnyis grub pa yod ma yin | |
de phyir da ltar byung ba dang | | ma ’ongs dus kyang yod ma yin | | 
3. Without presupposing “the past” the two things [“the present” and “future”] cannot be proved to exist.
Therefore neither present nor future time exist. 
Without being contingent on the past neither can be established. Hence the present and the future times also do not exist. 
 
答曰(6)不因過去時 則無未來時(7)亦無現在時 是故無二時(8)不因過去時。則不成未來現在時。何以故。(9)若不因過去時。有現在時者。於何處有(10)現在時。未來亦如是。於何處有未來時。是(11)故不因過去時。則無未來現在時。如是相(12)待有故。 
 
 
 
etenaivāvaśiṣṭau dvau krameṇa parivartakau |
uttamādhamamadhyādīn ekatvādīṃś ca lakṣayet || 4 || 
以如是義故 則知餘二時
上中下一異 是等法皆無 
rim pa’i tshul ni ’di nyid kyis | | lhag ma gnyis po bsnor ba dang | |
mchog dang tha ma ’bring la sogs | | gcig la sogs pa’ang (11b1)shes par bya | | 
4. In this way the remaining two [times] can be inverted.
Thus one would regard “highest,” “lowest” and “middle,” etc., as oneness and difference. (or “after,” “before” and “middle”, or “right,” “left” and “middle” …) 
These very stages can be applied to the other two. Superior, inferior, middling etc., singularity and so on can also be understood [thus]. 
 
實無有時(13)以如是義故 則知餘二時(14)上中下一異 是等法皆無(15)以如是義故。當知餘未來現在亦應無。及(16)上中下一異等諸法亦應皆無。如因上有(17)中下。離上則無中下。若離上有中下。則(18)不應相因待。因一故有異。因異故有一。(19)若一實有不應因異而有。若異實有。不應(20)因一而有。如是等諸法。亦應如是破。問曰。(21)如有歳月日須臾等差別故知有時。 
 
 
 
nāsthito gṛhyate kālaḥ sthitaḥ kālo na vidyate |
yo gṛhyetāgṛhītaś ca kālaḥ prajñapyate katham || 5 || 
時住不可得 時去亦叵得
時若不可得 云何說時相 
mi gnas dus ni ’dzin mi byed | | gang zhig gzung bar bya ba’i dus | |
gnas pa yod pa ma yin pas | | ma bzung dus ni ji ltar gdags | | 
5. A non-stationary “time” cannot be “grasped”; and a stationary “time” which can be grasped does not exist.
How, then, can one perceive time if it is not “grasped”? 
Non-dwelling time cannot be apprehended. Since time which can be apprehended, does not exist as something which dwells, how can one talk of unapprehendable time? 
 
答曰(22)時住不可得 時去亦叵得(23)時若不可得 云何説時相 
 
 
 
bhāvaṃ pratītya kālaś cet kālo bhāvād ṛte kutaḥ |
na ca kaś cana bhāvo ’sti kutaḥ kālo bhaviṣyati || 6 || 
因物故有時 離物何有時
物尚無所有 何況當有時 
gal te dus ni dngos brten te | | dngos med dus ni ga la yod | |
dngos po ’ga’ yang yod min na | | dus lta yod (2)par ga la ’gyur | | 
6. Since time is dependent on a thing (bhava), how can time [exist] without a thing?
There is not any thing which exists; how, then, will time become [something]? 
If time depended on things, where would time which is a non-thing exist? If there were no things at all, where would a view of time exist? 
 
(24)因物故有時 離物何有時(25)物尚無所有 何況當有時(26)時若不住不應可得。時住亦無。若時不可(27)得。云何説時相。若無時相則無時。因物生(28)故則名時。若離物則無時。上來種種因縁(29)破諸物。物無故何有時◎(26b1) 
 
 
 
kālaparīkṣā nāmaikonaviṃśatitamaṃ prakaraṇaṃ || 
 
dus brtag pa zhes bya ba ste rab tu byed pa bcu dgu pa’o || 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  hetoś ca pratyayānāṃ ca sāmagryā jāyate yadi |
phalam asti ca sāmagryāṃ sāmagryā jāyate katham || 1 || 
中論觀因果品第二十(二十四偈)  若眾緣和合 而有果生者
和合中已有 何須和合生 
  || gal te rgyu dang rkyen rnams kyi | | tshogs pa nyid las skye ’gyur zhing | |
tshogs la ’bras bu yod na ni | | ji ltar tshogs pa nyid las skye | | 
[Chapter] 20: An Analysis of the Aggregate (samagri) of Causes and Conditions (cause and effect)  1. If a product (phala) is produced through the aggregate of causes and conditions,
And exists in an aggregate, how will it be produced in the aggregate? 
Investigation of Combination  If a fruit is born from the combination of cause and conditions and exists in the combination, how can it be born from the combination itself? 
   
◎ 中論 觀因果品第二十 二十四偈  (2)問曰。衆因縁和合現有果生故。當知是果(3)從衆縁和合有。答曰(4)若衆縁和合 而有果生者(5)和合中已有 何須和合生(6)若謂衆因縁和合有果生。是果則和合中(7)已有。而從和合生者。是事不然。何以故。果(8)若先有定體。則不應從和合生。問曰。衆縁(9)和合中雖無果。而果從衆縁生者。有何咎。 
   
   
   
hetoś ca pratyayānāṃ ca sāmagryā jāyate yadi |
phalaṃ nāsti ca sāmagryāṃ sāmagryā jāyate katham || 2 || 
若眾緣和合 是中無果者
云何從眾緣 和合而果生 
gal te rgyu dang rkyen rnams kyi | | tshogs pa nyid (3)las skye ’gyur zhing | |
tshogs la ’bras bu med na ni | | ji ltar tshogs pa nyid las skye | | 
2. If a product is produced in the aggregate of causes and conditions,
And does not exist in the aggregate, how will it be produced in the aggregate? 
If a fruit is born from the combination of cause and conditions and does not exist in the combination, how can it be born from the combination itself? 
 
(10)答曰(11)若衆縁和合 是中無果者(12)云何從衆縁 和合而果生(13)若從衆縁和合則果生者。是和合中無果。(14)而從和合生。是事不然。何以故。若物無自(15)性。 
 
 
 
hetoś ca pratyayānāṃ ca sāmagryām asti cet phalam |
gṛhyeta nanu sāmagryāṃ sāmagryāṃ ca na gṛhyate || 3 || 
若眾緣和合 是中有果者
和合中應有 而實不可得 
gal te rgyu dang rkyen rnams kyi | | tshogs la ’bras bu yod na ni | |
tshogs la gzung du yod rigs na | | tshogs pa nyid la gzung du med | | 
3. If the product is in the aggregate of causes and conditions,
Would it not be “grasped” [i.e., located] in the aggregate? But it is not “grasped” in the aggregate. 
If the fruit exists in the combination of cause and conditions, it would be correct for it to be apprehendable in the combination but it is not apprehendable in the combination. 
 
是物終不生復次(16)若衆縁和合 是中有果者(17)和合中應有 而實不可得(18)若從衆縁和合中有果者。若色應可眼見。(19)若非色應可意知。而實和合中果不可得。是(20)故和合中有果。是事不然。 
 
 
 
hetoś ca pratyayānāṃ ca sāmagryāṃ nāsti cet phalam |
hetavaḥ pratyayāś ca syur ahetupratyayaiḥ samāḥ || 4 || 
若眾緣和合 是中無果者
是則眾因緣 與非因緣同 
gal te rgyu dang rkyen rnams kyi | | tshogs (4)la ’bras bu med na ni | |
rgyu rnams dang ni rkyen dag kyang | | rgyu rkyen ma yin mtshungs par ’gyur | | 
4. If the product is not in the aggregate of causes and conditions,
Then the causes and conditions would be the same as non-causes and non-conditions. 
If the fruit does not exist in the combination of cause and conditions, the causes and conditions would be comparable to non-causes and conditions. 
 
復次(21)若衆縁和合 是中無果者(22)是則衆因縁 與非因縁同(23)若衆縁和合中無果者。則衆因縁即同非因(24)縁。如乳是酪因縁。若乳中無酪。水中亦無(25)酪。若乳中無酪則與水同。不應言但從(26)乳出。是故衆縁和合中無果者。是事不然。(27)問曰。因爲果作因已滅。而有因果。無如(28)是咎。 
 
 
 
hetuṃ phalasya dattvā ca yadi hetur nirudhyate |
yad dattaṃ yan nirudhaṃ ca hetor ātmadvayaṃ bhavet || 5 || 
若因與果因 作因已而滅
是因有二體 一與一則滅 
gal te rgyus ni ’bras bu la | | rgyu byin nas ni ’gag ’gyur na | |
gang byin pa dang gang ’gags pa’i | | rgyu yi bdag nyid gnyis su ’gyur | | 
5. If a cause, having given the cause for a product, is stopped,
Then that which is “given” and that which is stopped would be two identities of the cause. 
If the cause stops once it has given the cause to the fruit, there would be a double nature of the cause: one that gives and one that stops. 
 
答曰(29)若因與果因 作因已而滅(26c1)是因有二體 一與一則滅(2)若因與果作因已而滅者是因則有二體。一(3)謂與因。二謂滅因。是事不然。一法有二體(4)故。是故因與果作因已而滅。是事不然。問(5)曰。若謂因不與果作因已而滅。亦有果生。(6)有何咎。 
 
 
 
hetuṃ phalasyādattvā ca yadi hetur nirudhyate |
hetau niruddhe jātaṃ tat phalam āhetukaṃ bhavet || 6 || 
若因不與果 作因已而滅
因滅而果生 是果則無因 
gal te rgyus ni ’bras bu la | | (5)rgyu ma byin par ’gag ’gyur na | |
rgyu ’gags nas ni skyes pa yi | | ’bras bu de dag rgyu med ’gyur | | 
6. If a cause without having given the cause for a product is stopped
Then, the cause being stopped, the product would be produced as something derived from a non-cause (ahetuka). 
If the cause stops without having given the cause to the fruit, those fruits which are born after the cause has stopped would be uncaused. 
 
答曰(7)若因不與果 作因已而滅(8)因滅而果生 是果則無因(9)若是因不與果。作因已而滅者。則因滅已(10)而果生。是果則無因。是事不然。何以故。現(11)見一切果。無有無因生者。是故汝説因不(12)與果作因已而滅亦有果生者。是事不然。(13)問曰。衆縁合時而有果生者。有何咎。 
 
 
 
phalaṃ sahaiva sāmagryā yadi prādurbhavet punaḥ |
ekakālau prasajyete janako yaś ca janyate || 7 || 
若眾緣合時 而有果生者
生者及可生 則為一時俱 
gal te tshogs dang lhan cig tu | | ’bras bu yang ni skye ’gyur na | |
skyed par byed dang bskyed bya gang | | dus gcig par ni thal bar ’gyur | | 
7. If the product would become visible concomitantly with the aggregate [of causes and conditions],
Then it would logically follow that the producer and that which is produced [exist] in the same moment. 
If the fruit were also born at the same time as the combination, it would follow that the producer and the produced would be simultaneous. 
 
答曰(14)若衆縁合時 而有果生者(15)生者及可生 則爲一時倶(16)若衆縁合時有果生者。則生者可生即一時(17)倶。但是事不爾何以故。如父子不得一時(18)生。是故汝説衆縁合時有果生者。是事不(19)然。問曰。若先有果生。而後衆縁合。有何咎。 
 
 
 
pūrvam eva ca sāmagryāḥ phalaṃ prādurbhaved yadi |
hetupratyayanirmuktaṃ phalam āhetukaṃ bhavet || 8 || 
若先有果生 而後眾緣合
此即離因緣 名為無因果 
gal te tshogs pa’i snga rol (6)du | | ’bras bu skyes par gyur na ni | |
rgyu dang rkyen rnams med pa yi | | ’bras bu rgyu med ’byung bar ’gyur | | 
8. If the product would become visible before the aggregate,
Then the product, without being related to causes and conditions, would be something derived from a non-cause. 
If the fruit were born prior to the combination, there would occur an uncaused fruit which has no cause and conditions. 
 
(20)答曰(21)若先有果生 而後衆縁合(22)此即離因縁 名爲無因果(23)若衆縁未合。而先有果生者。是事不然。(24)果離因縁故。則名無因果。是故汝説衆縁(25)未合時先有果生者。是事則不然。問曰。因(26)滅變爲果者。有何咎。 
 
 
 
niruddhe cet phalaṃ hetau hetoḥ saṃkramaṇaṃ bhavet |
pūrvajātasya hetoś ca punarjanma prasajyate || 9 || 
若因變為果 因即至於果
是則前生因 生已而復生 
gal te rgyu ’gags ’bras bu na | | rgyu ni kun tu ’pho bar ’gyur | |
sngon skyes pa yi rgyu yang ni | | yang skye bar ni thal bar ’gyur | | 
9. If, when the cause of the product is stopped, there would be a continuation of the cause,
It would logically follow that there would be another production of the previous producing cause. 
If [when] a cause stops, it is forever transferred to the fruit, then it would follow that the cause which was born before would be born again. 
 
答曰(27)若因變爲果 因即至於果(28)是則前生因 生已而復生(29)因有二種。一者前生。二者共生。若因滅變(27a1)爲果。是前生因應還更生。但是事不然。何(2)以故。已生物不應更生。若謂是因即變(3)爲果。是亦不然。何以故。若即是不名爲(4)變。若變不名即是。問曰。因不盡滅但名字(5)滅。而因體變爲果。如泥團變爲瓶。失泥團(6)名而瓶名生。答曰。泥團先滅而有瓶生。(7)不名爲變。又泥團體不獨生。瓶盆甕等皆(8)從泥中出。若泥團但有名。不應變爲瓶。(9)變名如乳變爲酪。是故汝説因名雖滅而(10)變爲果。是事不然。問曰。因雖滅失而能(11)生果。是故有果。無如是咎。 
 
 
 
janayet phalam utpannaṃ niruddho ’staṃgataḥ katham |
hetus tiṣṭhann api kathaṃ phalena janayed vṛtaḥ || 10 || 
云何因滅失 而能生於果
又若因在果 云何因生果 
’gags pa nub par gyur pa yis | | (7)’bras bu skyes pa ji ltar skyed | |
’bras bu dang ni ’brel ba’i rgyu | | gnas pas kyang ni ji ltar skyed | | 
10. How can that which is stopped, i.e., something which has disappeared, produce the arising of a product?
How could a cause which is enclosed by its product, even though it persists, originate [that product]? 
How can the production of fruit be produced by the stopping and disappearing [of something]? Also how can fruit be produced by related causes which persist with it? 
 
答曰(12)云何因滅失 而能生於果(13)又若因在果 云何因生果(14)若因滅失已。云何能生果。若因不滅而與(15)果合。何能更生果。問曰。是因遍有果而果(16)生。 
 
 
 
athāvṛtaḥ phalenāsau katamaj janayet phalam |
na hy adṛṣṭvā na dṛṣṭvāpi3 hetur janayate phalam || 11 || 
若因遍有果 更生何等果
因見不見果 是二俱不生 
ci ste rgyu ’bras ma ’brel na | | ’bras bu gang zhig skyed par byed | |
rgyus ni mthong dang ma mthong bar | | ’bras bu skyed par mi byed do | | 
11. Or if that [cause] were not enclosed by the product, which product would it produce?
For the cause does not produce the product, having seen or not having seen [the product]. 
If cause and fruit are not related, what fruit can be produced? Causes do not produce fruits they either see or don’t see. 
 
答曰(17)若因遍有果 更生何等果(18)因見不見果 是二倶不生(19)是因若不見果。尚不應生果。何況見。若因(20)自不見果。則不應生果。何以故。若不見(21)果。果則不隨因。又未有果。云何生果若(22)因先見果。不應復生。果已有故。 
 
 
 
nātītasya hy atītena phalasya saha hetunā |
nājātena na jātena saṃgatir jātu vidyate || 12 || 
若言過去因 而於過去果
未來現在果 是則終不合 
’bras bu ’das pa rgyu ’das dang | | ma skyes pa dang (12a1)skyes pa dang | |
lhan cig phrad par ’gyur pa ni | | nam yang yod pa ma yin no | | 
12. There is no concomitance of a past product with a past cause, a future [cause] or present [cause]. 
The simultaneous connection of a past fruit with a past, a future and a present cause never exists. 
 
復次(23)若言過去因 而於過去果(24)未來現在果 是則終不合 
 
 
 
na jātasya hy4 ajātena phalasya saha hetunā |
nātītena na jātena saṃgatir jātu vidyate || 13 || 
若言未來因 而於未來果
現在過去果 是則終不合 
’bras bu skyes pa rgyu ma skyes | | ’das pa dang ni skyes pa dang | |
lhan cig phrad par ’gyur pa ni | | nam yang yod pa ma yin no | | 
13. Certainly there is no concomitance of the present product with future cause, past [cause] or present [cause]. 
The simultaneous connection of a present fruit with a future, a past and a present cause never exists. 
 
(25)若言未來因 而於未來果(26)現在過去果 是則終不合 
 
 
 
nājātasya hi jātena phalasya saha hetunā |
nājātena na naṣṭena saṃgatir jātu vidyate || 14 || 
若言現在因 而於現在果
未來過去果 是則終不合 
’bras bu ma skyes rgyu skyes dang | | ma skyes pa dang ’das pa dang | (2)lhan cig phrad par ’gyur ba ni | | nam yang yod pa ma yin no | | 
14. Certainly there is no concomitance of a future product with a present cause, future [cause] or past [cause]. 
The simultaneous connection of a future fruit with a present, a future and a past cause never exists. 
 
(27)若言現在因 而於現在果(28)未來過去果 是則終不合(29)過去果不與過去未來現在因合。未來果(27b1)不與未來現在過去因合。現在果不與現(2)在未來過去因合。如是三種果。終不與過(3)去未來現在因合。 
 
 
 
asatyāṃ saṃgatau hetuḥ kathaṃ janayate phalam |
satyāṃ vā saṃgatau hetuḥ kathaṃ janayate phalam || 15 || 
若不和合者 因何能生果
若有和合者 因何能生果 
phrad pa yod pa ma yin na | | rgyus ni ’bras bu ji ltar skyed | |
phrad pa yod pa yin na yang | | rgyus ni ’bras bu ji ltar skyed | | 
15. If there is no concomitance whatever, how would the cause produce the product?
Or if a concomitance exists, how would the cause produce the product? 
When there is no connection, how can a cause produce fruit? Even when there is connection, how can a cause produce fruit? 
 
復次(4)若不和合者 因何能生果(5)若有和合者 因何能生果(6)若因果不和合則無果。若無果云何因能(7)生果。若謂因果和合時因能生果者。是亦(8)不然。何以故。若果在因中。則因中已有果。(9)云何而復生。 
 
 
 
hetuḥ phalena śūnyaś cet kathaṃ janayate phalam |
hetuḥ phalenāśūnyaś cet kathaṃ janayate phalam || 16 || 
若因空無果 因何能生果
若因不空果 因何能生果 
gal te ’bras bus stong pa’i rgyus | | ji ltar ’bras bu skyed par byed | |
gal te ’bras bus mi stong (3)rgyus | | ji ltar ’bras bu skyed par byed | | 
16. If the cause is empty of a product, how would it produce the product?
If the cause is not empty of a product, how would it produce the product? 
If a cause is empty of fruit, how can it produce fruit? If a cause is not empty of fruit, how can it produce fruit? 
 
復次(10)若因空無果 因何能生果(11)若因不空果 因何能生果(12)若因無果者。以無果故因空。云何因生果。(13)如人不懷妊。云何能生子。若因先有果。已(14)有果故不應復生。 
 
 
 
phalaṃ notpatsyate5 ’śūnyam aśūnyaṃ na nirotsyate |
aniruddham anutpannam aśūnyaṃ tad bhaviṣyati || 17 || 
果不空不生 果不空不滅
以果不空故 不生亦不滅 
’bras bu mi stong skye mi ’gyur | | mi stong ’gag par mi ’gyur ro | |
mi stong de ni mi ’gags dang | | ma skyes par yang ’gyur pa yin | | 
17. A non-empty product would not be originated, [and] a non-empty [product] would not be destroyed.
Then that is non-empty which will not originate or not disappear. 
Unempty fruit would not be produced; the unempty would not stop. That unempty is unstoppable and also unproducable. 
 
復次今當説果(15)果不空不生 果不空不滅(16)以果不空故 不生亦不滅 
 
 
 
katham utpatsyate śūnyaṃ kathaṃ śūnyaṃ nirotsyate |
śūnyam apy aniruddhaṃ tad anutpannaṃ prasajyate || 18 || 
果空故不生 果空故不滅
以果是空故 不生亦不滅 
stong pa ji ltar skye ’gyur zhing | | stong pa ji ltar ’gag par ’gyur | |
stong pa de yang ma ’gags dang | | ma skyes (4)par yang thal bar ’gyur | | 
18. How would that be produced which is empty?
How would that be destroyed which is empty?
It logically follows, then, that which is empty is not originated and not destroyed. 
How would empty [fruit] be produced? And how would the empty stop? It follows that that empty too is unstoppable and also unproducable. 
 
(17)果空故不生 果空故不滅(18)以果是空故 不生亦不滅(19)果若不空。不應生不應滅。何以故。果若因(20)中先決定有。更不須復生。生無故無滅。是(21)故果不空故。不生不滅。若謂果空故有生(22)滅。是亦不然。何以故。果若空。空名無所有。(23)云何當有生滅。是故説果空故不生不滅。 
 
 
 
hetoḥ phalasya caikatvaṃ na hi jātūpapadyate |
hetoḥ phalasya cānyatvaṃ na hi jātūpapadyate || 19 || 
因果是一者 是事終不然
因果若異者 是事亦不然 
rgyu dang ’bras bu gcig nyid du | | nam yang ’thad par mi ’gyur ro | |
rgyu dang ’bras bu gzhan nyid du | | nam yang ’thad par mi ’gyur ro | | 
19. Certainly a oneness of cause and product is not possible at all.
Nor is a difference of cause and product possible at all. 
It is never possible that cause and fruit are identical. It is never possible that cause and fruit are other. 
 
(24)復次今以一異破因果(25)因果是一者 是事終不然(26)因果若異者 是事亦不然 
 
 
 
ekatve phalahetvoḥ syād aikyaṃ janakajanyayoḥ |
pṛthaktve phalahetvoḥ syāt tulyo hetur ahetunā || 20 || 
若因果是一 生及所生一
若因果是異 因則同非因 
rgyu dang ’bras bu gcig nyid na | | bskyed bya skyed byed gcig tu ’gyur | |
rgyu dang ’bras bu gzhan nyid na | | rgyu dang rgyu min (5)mtshungs par ’gyur | | 
20. If there were a oneness of the cause and product, then there would be an identity of the originator and what is originated.
If there were a difference of product and cause, then a cause would be the same as that which is not a cause. 
If cause and fruit were identical, produce and producer would be identical. If cause and fruit were other, cause and non-cause would be similar. 
 
(27)若因果是一 生及所生一(28)若因果是異 因則同非因 
 
 
 
phalaṃ svabhāvasadbhūtaṃ kiṃ hetur janayiṣyati |
phalaṃ svabhāvāsadbhūtaṃ kiṃ hetur janayiṣyati || 21 || 
若果定有性 因為何所生
若果定無性 因為何所生 
’bras bu ngo bo nyid yod na | | rgyus ni ci zhig skyed par byed | |
’bras bu ngo bo nyid med na | | rgyus ni ci zhig skyed par byed | | 
21. Can a cause produce a product which is essentially existing in itself (svabhva)?
Can a cause produce a product which is not essentially existing in itself (svabhava)? 
If fruit existed essentially, what would a cause produce? If fruit did not exist essentially, what would a cause produce? 
 
(29)若果定有性 因爲何所生(27c1)若果定無性 因爲何所生 
 
 
 
na cājanayamānasya hetutvam upapadyate |
hetutvānupapattau ca phalaṃ kasya bhaviṣyati || 22 || 
因不生果者 則無有因相
若無有因相 誰能有是果 
skyed par byed pa ma yin na | | rgyu nyid ’thad par mi ’gyur ro | |
rgyu nyid ’thad pa yod min na | | ’bras bu gang gi yin par ’gyur | | 
22. It is not possible to have “what is by its nature a cause” (hetutva) of “that which is not producing.”
If “what is by its nature a cause” is not possible, whose product will exist? 
If it were not productive, the cause itself would be impossible. If the cause itself were impossible, whose would the fruit be? 
 
(2)因不生果者 則無有因相(3)若無有因相 誰能有是果 
 
 
 
na ca pratyayahetūnām iyam ātmānam ātmanā |
yā sāmagrī janayate sā kathaṃ janayet6 phalam || 23 || 
若從眾因緣 而有和合生
和合自不生 云何能生果 
rgyu rnams (6)dang ni rkyen dag gi | | tshogs pa gang yin de yin ni | |
bdag gis bdag nyid mi skyed na | | ’bras bu ji ltar skyed par byed | | 
23. How will that [aggregate of causes and conditions] produce a product when
That which is the aggregate of causes and conditions does not produce itself by itself? 
If whatever is a combination of causes and conditions does not produce itself by itself, how could it produce fruit? 
 
(4)若從衆因縁 而有和合生(5)和合自不生 云何能生果 
 
 
 
na sāmagrīkṛtaṃ phalaṃ7 nāsāmagrīkṛtaṃ phalam |
asti pratyayasāmagrī kuta eva phalaṃ vinā || 24 || 
是故果不從 緣合不合生
若無有果者 何處有合法 
de phyir tshogs pas byas pa med | | tshogs min byas pa’i ’bras bu med | |
’bras bu yod pa ma yin na | | rkyen gyi tshogs pa ga la yod | | 
24. The product is not produced by the aggregate; nor is the product not produced by the aggregate.
Without the product, how is there an aggregate of conditions? 
Therefore, there is no fruit which has been made by combination [or] made by non-combination. If fruit does not exist, where can a combination of conditions exist? 
 
(6)是故果不從 縁合不合生(7)若無有果者 何處有合法(8)是衆縁和合法。不能生自體。自體無故云(9)何能生果。是故果不從縁合生。亦不從不(10)合生。若無有果者。何處有合法 
 
 
 
sāmagrīparīkṣā nāma vimśatitamaṃ prakaraṇaṃ || 
 
tshogs pa brtag pa (7)zhes bya ba ste rab tu byed pa nyi shu pa’o || 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Permanent link
Go to Wiki Documentation
Enhet: Det humanistiske fakultet   Utviklet av: IT-seksjonen ved HF
Login