ya eva hetus traikālye pratiṣedhavācī sa uktotaraḥ pratyavagantavyaḥ | kasmāt | sādhyasamatvāt |
tathā hi tvadvacanena pratiṣedhas traikālye ’nupapannapratiṣedhavat sa pratiṣedho ’pi | tasmāt pratiṣedhapratiṣedhye ’sati yad bhavān manyate pratiṣedhaḥ pratisiddha iti tad na |
yas trikālapratiṣedhavācī hetur eṣa eva śūnyatāvādināṃ prāptaḥ sarvabhāvasvabhāvapratiṣedhakatvān na bhavataḥ |
atha vā katham etad uktottaram | pratiṣedhayāmi nāhaṃ kiṃcit pratiṣedhyam asti na ca kiṃcit | tasmāt pratiṣedhayasīty adhilaya eṣa tvayā kriyate || iti pratyuktam |
atha manyase triṣv api kāleṣu pratiṣedhaḥ iddhaḥ, dṛṣṭaḥ pūrvakālīno ’pi hetuḥ, uttarakālīno ’pi, yugapatkālīno ’pi hetuḥ, tatra pūrvakālīno hetur yathā pitā putrasya, paścāt kālīno yathā śiṣya ācāryasya, yugapatkālīno yathā pradīpaḥ prakāśasyety atra brūmaḥ |
na caitad evam, | uktā hy etasmin krame trayaḥ pūrvadoṣāḥ |
api ca yady evaṃ, pratiṣedhasadbhāvas tvayābhyupagamyate pratijñāhāniś ca te bhavati | etena krameṇa svabhāvapratiṣedho ’pi siddhaḥ |
此偈明何義 若遮此因三時言語 此先已答 應如是知 何以故 因平等故
如遮三時彼不相應 彼語亦在遮所遮中 若汝意謂 無遮所遮猶故得遮 我已遮竟
此三時因與說空人言語相應
又復云何 先已說竟 如向偈言我無有少物 是故我不遮如是汝無理 ……橫而難我若汝復謂
三時遮成 見前時因見後時因 見俱時因 彼前時因如父以子 後時因者如師弟子 俱時因者如燈以明 此我今說
此不如是前說三種 彼三種中一一復有三種過失
此前已說 復次第遮 汝立宗失如是等自體遮成 偈言
gtan tshigs dus gsum ’gog par byed pa źes bya ba gaṅ yin pa de ni lan btab zin te | gaṅ gi phyir źe na bsgrub par bya ba daṅ mtshuṅs pa’i phyir ro ||
’di ltar khyod kyi tshig gis ’gog pa dus gsum du yaṅ mi ’thad par ’gyur ba’i ’gog pa bźin du dgag par bya ba yaṅ de yin no || de’i phyir ’gog pa daṅ dgag par bya ba med na ’gog pa bkag go sñam du khyod sems pa gaṅ yin pa de mi ruṅ ṅo ||
’gog pa dus gsum la źes bya ba’i gtan tshigs dus gsum ’gog par byed pa źes bya ba gaṅ yin pa de ñid ni dṅos po thams cad ’gog par byed pa źes bya ba gaṅ yin pa’i phyir stoṅ pa ñid smra ba rnams la yod pa ñid yin gyi | khyod la ni med do ||
yaṅ na ’di ji ltar lan btab pa yin źe na | dgag bya ci yaṅ med pas na || ṅa ni ci yaṅ mi ’gog go || de phyir ’gog par byed do źes || skur ba de ni khyod kyis btab || ces lan btab pa yin no ||
’on te dus gsum car du yaṅ ’gog pa grub pa yin pas te | sṅon gyi dus kyi rgyu daṅ | phyi ma’i dus kyi rgyu daṅ | cig car gyi dus kyi rgyu yaṅ mthoṅ bas so || de la sṅon gyi dus kyi rgyu ni ji lta bu’i pha bźin no || phyi ma’i dus kyi ni ji ltar slob dpon gyis slob ma bźin no || cig car gyi dus kyi ni ji ltar snaṅ ba’i sgron ma bźin no sñam du sems na
de ni de lta ma yin par tshul ’di la skyon sṅar bstan zin to ||
gźan yaṅ gal te de lta yin na dgag pa srid par khyod kyis khas blaṅs la | de ni ma grub pas khyod kyis dam bcas pa yaṅ ñams pa yin no || rgyu ’dis raṅ bźin ’gog pa yaṅ grub pa yin no ||
It has to be understood that the question why a negation is possible in the three times has already received. -Why? -Because the reason is of the same nature as the thesis to be established.
To explain: In virtue of your statement, a negation is not possible in the three times, and, like the negation, the thing to be negated, also, does not exist. Thus, there being no negation and no object to be negated, your opinion that the negation has been negated, is untenable.
That very reason which expresses a negation of the three times is obtained for the upholders of the doctrine of voidness, for they negate the intrinsic nature of all things, - not for you.
Or it has been answered in the following way: ‘I do not negate anything, nor is there anything to be negated. You, therefore, calumniate me when you say: “You negate”’.
Now, if you think: the negation is established in all the three; we see the antecedent cause, the subsequent cause, and the simultaneous cause: antecedent cause, e.g., the father as the cause of the son; subsequent cause, e.g., the disciple as the cause of the teacher; simultaneous cause, e.g., the lamp as the cause of the light,
- we reply: this is not so. For in this way are stated the three former defects.
Moreover, if this is so, you admit the existence of a negation, and you abandon your proposition. The negation of an intrinsic nature is also established in this way.
Complete text
Verse 1-10