yac ca bhavān bravīti, ṛte ’pi vacanād asataḥ pratiṣedhaḥ prasiddhaḥ, tatra kiṃ niḥsvabhāvāḥ sarvabhāvā ity etat tvadvacanaṃ karotīti, atra brūmaḥ |
niḥsvabhāvāḥ sarvabhāva ity etat khalu vacanaṃ na niḥsvabhāvān eva sarvabhāvān karoti |
kiṃ tv asati svabhāve bhāvā niḥsvabhāvā iti jñāpayati |
tadyathā kaścid brūyād avidyamānagṛhe devadatte ’sti gṛhe devadatta iti | tatrainaṃ kaścit pratibrūyān nāstīti |
na tad vacanaṃ devadattasyāsadbhāvaṃ karoti kiṃ tu jñapayati kevalam asaṃbhavaṃ gṛhe devadattasya |
tadvan nāsti svabhāvo bhāvānām ity etad vacanaṃ na bhāvānāṃ niḥsvabhāvatvaṃ karoti kiṃtu sarvabhāveṣu svabhāvasyābhāvaṃ jñāpayati |
tatra yad bhavatoktaṃ kiṃ asati svabhāve nāsti svabhāva ity etad vacanaṃ karoti, ṛte ’pi vacanāt prasiddhaḥ svabhāvasyābhāva iti tan na yuktaṃ |
anyac ca | bālānām iva mithyā mṛgatṛṣṇāyāṃ yathājalagrāhaḥ | evaṃ mithyāgrāhaḥ syāt te pratiṣedhyato hy asataḥ || ity ādayo yā punaś catasro gāthā bhavatoktā atra brūmaḥ
此偈明何義 若汝說言無有言語亦成遮者 隨何等法 彼一切法皆無自體 說彼諸法無自體語 非此言語作無自體 此我今答
若說諸法無自體語 此語非作無自體法
又復有義 以無法體知無法體 以有法體知有法體
譬如屋中實無天得 有人問言 有天得不 答者言有 復有言無
答言無者語言 不能於彼屋中作天得 無但知屋中空無天得
如是若說一切諸法無自體者 此語不能作一切法無自體 無但知諸法自體無體
若汝說言 若無物者則不得言法無自體 以無語故 不得成法無自體者 義不相應
又復汝說偈言如愚癡之人 妄取炎為水若汝遮妄取 其事亦如是取所取能取 遮所遮能遮如是六種義 皆悉是有法若無取所取 亦無有能取則無遮所遮 亦無有能遮若無遮所遮 亦無有能遮則一切法成 彼自體亦成此四行偈 我今答汝偈言
khyod kyi tshig dag med par yaṅ ste | tshig ma gtogs par yaṅ med pa’i ’gog pa ’grub na | de la ci’i dṅos po thams cad raṅ bźin med pa yin no źes smras pa’i khyod kyi tshig des ci źig byed ces smras pa gaṅ yin pa ’di la bśad par bya ste |
dṅos po thams cad raṅ bźin med pa’o źes bya ba’i tshig ’di ni dṅos po rnams raṅ bźin med pa ñid du byed pa ma yin gyi |
’on kyaṅ raṅ bźin med pa la dṅos po rnams raṅ bźin med pa’o źes go bar byed pa yin no ||
dper na ’ga’ źig na re lha sbyin khyim na med bźin du lha sbyin khyim na yod do źes zer ba daṅ | de ni de la kha cig na re med do źes zer ba na |
tshig des lha sbyin med par mi byed kyi lha sbyin khyim na mi srid par ston pa ’ba’ źig tu zad do ||
de bźin du dṅos po rnams kyi raṅ bźin med do źes bya ba’i tshig de yaṅ dṅos po rnams kyi raṅ bźin med pa ñid du byed pa ma yin gyi | ’on kyaṅ dṅos po thams cad raṅ bźin med pa sgyu ma’i skyes bu daṅ ’dra bar skyes bu yaṅ dag pa’i ṅo bo daṅ bral ba rnams la rmoṅs pa’i phyir | byis pa skye bo ma rig pas rmoṅs pa rnams kyi raṅ bźin daṅ bcas pa ñid du sgro btags pa rnams la raṅ bźin yod pa ma yin par go bar byed pa yin pas
de la raṅ bźin yod pa ma yin na tshig med par yaṅ ste tshig ma gtogs par yaṅ raṅ bźin yod pa ma yin par rab tu grub pa yin no || raṅ bźin med do źes bya ba’i tshig des ci źig byed ces khyod kyis smras pa gaṅ yin pa de rigs pa ma yin no ||
gźan yaṅ | byis pa rnams ni smig rgyu la || ji ltar log par chur ’dzin ltar || de bźin khyod kyis log par ’dzin || yod pa yin la dgag par bya || źes bśad pa la sogs pa yaṅ khyod kyis tshigs su bcad pa bźi smras pa gaṅ yin pa ’di la bśad par bya ste |
Regarding your statement: ‘The negation of the non-existent is established even without words; what purpose is, therefore, served by your statement “All things are devoid of an intrinsic nature” we observe:
The statement: ‘All things are devoid of an intrinsic nature’, does not make all things devoid of an intrinsic nature.
But, since there is no intrinsic nature, it makes known that the things are devoid of an intrinsic nature.
Here is an example: While Devadatta is not in the house, somebody says that Devadatta is in the house. On that occasion, somebody tells him in reply: ‘He is not [in the house]’.
That statement does not create Devadatta’s non-existence, but only makes known Devadatta’s non-existence in the house.
Similarly the statement ‘things have no intrinsic nature’ does not create the being-devoid-of-an-intrinsic-nature of the things, but makes known the absence of an intrinsic nature in all things.
- In these circumstances, your statement: ‘If there is no intrinsic nature, what purpose is served by the statement “There is no intrinsic nature”? The absence of an intrinsic nature is established even without words’, is not appropriate.
Complete text
Verse 1-10