English
English version: Why is that? For example, if poison is placed in milk, even when it is processed into *醍醐* (daigo, the finest cream), it can still kill people. The nature of milk is different, and the nature of *醍醐* is also different. Although they arise in different stages, their similarity is not broken, so they can cause harm. The five *skandhas* (five aggregates: form, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness) are also like this. Although they are different and arise in sequence, their similarity is not broken. Therefore, it can be said that different actions lead to different results (*异作异受*), actions immediately produce results (*即作即受*), and no action leads to no result (*无作无受*). If one is separate from the five *skandhas*, there is no 'self' or 'what belongs to self'. All sentient beings are inverted and have deluded minds, either saying that form (*色*) is the self, or even that consciousness (*识*) is the self. Or some say: form is the self, and the other four *skandhas* are what belong to the self, and so on, even consciousness is like that. If someone says: apart from the five *skandhas*, there is another 'self', that is not possible. Why is that? In my Buddha-dharma, form is not the self. Why is that? Because it is impermanent, not self-made, and not independent. Therefore, the other four *skandhas* are not called what belongs to the self; even consciousness is like that. Various causes and conditions come together, and different *dharmas* (phenomena) arise, so it is called 'action' (*作*), but in reality, there is no different 'action'; various causes and conditions come together, and different *dharmas* arise, it is called 'receiver' (*受者*), but in reality, there is no different 'receiving'; therefore, it is called no action and no receiving (*无作无受*). If you think: different actions lead to different results, why does this person's karma not affect that person? Because they both have five *skandhas*! This statement is not correct. Why is that? 'Different' has two types: one is different bodies, and the other is different names. For example, one is obtained by the Buddha, and the other is obtained by the *Devas* (gods). The bodies and names obtained by the Buddha and the *Devas* are different. Because of this reason, body and speech should be different; because body and speech are different, the karma created is also different; because the karma created is different, lifespan, appearance and strength (*色力*), peace (*安*), and eloquence (*辩*) are also different. Therefore, the karma created by the Buddha cannot be received by the *Devas*. Although they both have five *skandhas*, form and name are the same, but feeling, perception, and mental formations are different. Why is that? The Buddha experiences happiness, while the *Devas* experience suffering. The Buddha generates greed, while the *Devas* generate anger. Therefore, they cannot be called similar. Although form and name are the same, in reality, there are differences, for example, the Buddha obtains white color, while the *Devas* obtain black color. If you consider things to be the same because they have the same name, then when one person is born, everyone should be born, and when one person dies, everyone should die! If you do not want to acknowledge this idea, then you cannot say different actions --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
异受。汝意若谓：汝亦异作异受，我亦如是异作异受；若异作异受，应同我过，何故不见自过而责我者！是义不然。何以故？我异二种：一、次第生亦次第灭，二者、次第生不次第灭。是生异故，灭亦复异，是故我言：异作异受，此作此受，不同汝过。 “譬如有人欲烧聚落，于干草中放一粒火，是火次第生因缘故，能烧百里至二百里。村主求得，即便问之：‘汝弊恶人，何因缘故烧是大村？’彼人答言：‘实非我烧。何以故？我所放火，寻已灭尽，所烧之处一把草耳，我今当还偿汝二把，其余之物我不应偿。’是时村主，复作是言：‘痴人！因汝小火，次第生火，遂烧百里至二百里。辜由于汝，云何不偿？’虽知是火异作异烧，相续不断，故彼得罪。善恶五阴亦复如是，受报时阴虽言不作，以其次第相续而生，是故受报。 “譬如有人与他共䞈，执炬远行至百里外，若不至者当输罚负，如其到者汝当输我。执炬之人至百里已，即从责物。他言：‘汝炬发迹已灭，云何于此从我索物？’执炬者言：‘彼火虽灭，次第相续生来至此。’如是二人，说俱得理。何以故？如是义者，亦即亦异，是故二人俱无过失。若有说言：五阴亦尔，即作即受，异作异受，俱无过失。譬如此彼二岸、中流，总名恒河，夏时二岸 现代汉语译本 关于异受（不同的行为导致不同的结果）的问题。如果你的意思是：你做的事情由你来承担后果，我做的事情由我来承担后果；如果不同的行为导致不同的结果，那么我们应该和你犯的错误一样承担责任，为什么你没有看到自己的过错反而指责我呢！这种说法是不对的。为什么呢？我所说的‘异’包含两种情况：第一种是，次第产生也次第灭亡，第二种是，次第产生但不次第灭亡。因为产生的方式不同，所以灭亡的方式也不同，因此我说：不同的行为导致不同的结果，这个行为导致这个结果，这和你的情况不同。 ‘譬如有人想要焚烧一个村落，在干燥的草丛中点燃一粒火星，这火星因为次第产生的因缘，能够燃烧一百里甚至两百里。村长抓住了这个人，就问他：‘你这个恶人，因为什么原因焚烧这个大村庄？’那个人回答说：‘实际上不是我烧的。为什么呢？我所放的火，很快就熄灭了，所烧的地方只是一把草而已，我现在应当偿还你两把草，其余的东西我不应该偿还。’这时村长，又这样说：‘愚蠢的人！因为你点燃的小火星，次第产生大火，于是焚烧了一百里甚至两百里。罪责在于你，怎么能不赔偿呢？’虽然知道这火是不同的行为导致不同的燃烧，相续不断，所以他被判有罪。善恶五阴（色、受、想、行、识五种构成要素）也是这样，接受果报的时候，虽然可以说这个阴没有做过，但是因为其次第相续而产生，所以要接受果报。 ‘譬如有人与他人共同约定，拿着火把远行到百里之外，如果不能到达就要输掉赌注，如果到达了你就应该输给我。拿着火把的人到达百里之后，就向对方索要赌注。对方说：‘你的火把在出发的地方就已经熄灭了，为什么在这里向我索要东西？’拿着火把的人说：‘那火虽然熄灭了，但是次第相续地产生并延续到这里。’像这样的两个人，说的都有道理。为什么呢？像这样的道理，既相同又不同，所以两个人都没有过错。如果有人说：五阴也是这样，即时做即时承受，不同的行为导致不同的结果，都没有过错。譬如像此岸、彼岸和中间的河流，总称为恒河（Ganges），夏天的时候两岸
English
English version Regarding the acceptance of different consequences (different actions leading to different results). If you mean: you bear the consequences of your actions, and I bear the consequences of my actions; if different actions lead to different results, then we should bear the responsibility for our mistakes as you do, why don't you see your own faults but blame me! This statement is incorrect. Why? The 'different' I speak of includes two situations: first, arising in sequence and also ceasing in sequence, and second, arising in sequence but not ceasing in sequence. Because the way of arising is different, so the way of ceasing is also different, therefore I say: different actions lead to different results, this action leads to this result, which is different from your situation. ‘For example, if someone wants to burn down a village, they light a spark in dry grass, and this spark, due to the sequential arising of conditions, can burn a hundred or even two hundred *li*. The village chief catches this person and asks him: ‘You wicked person, for what reason did you burn down this large village?’ That person replies: ‘Actually, it wasn't me who burned it. Why? The fire I lit extinguished quickly, and the place burned was only a handful of grass, I should now compensate you with two handfuls of grass, I should not compensate for the rest.’ At this time, the village chief says again: ‘Foolish person! Because of the small spark you lit, fire arose sequentially, and then burned a hundred or even two hundred *li*. The blame lies with you, how can you not compensate?’ Although it is known that this fire is different actions leading to different burning, continuously, so he is found guilty. The good and evil five *skandhas* (form, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness) are also like this, when receiving retribution, although it can be said that this *skandha* did not do it, but because of its sequential arising, it receives retribution. ‘For example, if someone makes an agreement with another person to carry a torch far away to a hundred *li*, if they cannot reach it, they must lose the bet, if they reach it, you should lose to me. The person carrying the torch, after reaching a hundred *li*, demands the bet from the other person. The other person says: ‘Your torch was extinguished at the starting point, why are you asking me for something here?’ The person carrying the torch says: ‘Although that fire was extinguished, it arose sequentially and continued to this place.’ Like these two people, both are right. Why? Like this principle, it is both the same and different, so neither person is at fault. If someone says: the five *skandhas* are also like this, doing and receiving at the same time, different actions leading to different results, neither is at fault. For example, like this shore, that shore, and the river in between, all are called the Ganges (恒河), in summer the two shores --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
相去甚远，秋时二岸相去则近，无常定相，或大或小，虽复增减，人皆谓河。或有说言：此不是河，智人亦说有异、不异。五阴亦尔，智人亦说即作即受，异作异受。汝意若谓：二岸是土，中流是水，河神是河。是义不然！何以故？若神是河，何故复言河清、河浊，有此岸、彼岸、中流深浅，到于大海，可度、不度！譬如有树，则有神居，若无树者，神何所居？河之与神，亦应如是。是故彼此二岸、中流，次第不断，总名为河。是故可言即之与异，五阴亦尔。 “譬如有人骂辱贵胜，因恶口故，脚被锁械，是脚实无恶口之罪而被锁械，是故不得决定说言：异作异受，即作即受。唯有智者可得说言：即作即受，异作异受。譬如器、油、炷火、人护，众缘和合乃名灯明。汝意若谓灯明增减。是义不然！何以故？灭故不增，来故无减，以次第生故言灯增减。汝意若谓：灯是无常，油即是常，油多明多，油少明少者。是义不然！何以故？油无常故，有尽、有烧，如其常者，应二念住；若二念住，谁能烧尽？是故智人亦复说言：灯明即异，五阴亦尔。明即六入，油即是业，油业因缘故令五阴有增有减，有彼有此。如有人说阿坻耶语，是阿坻耶久已过去，不在今日，世人相传，次第不灭，故得称为阿坻耶语。智者亦说是阿坻 现代汉语译本 相去甚远，秋天时两岸相距较近，没有永恒不变的形态，或大或小，即使有所增减，人们都称之为河。或许有人说：‘这不是河’，智者也会说有相同之处，也有不同之处。五阴（色、受、想、行、识，构成人的五种要素）也是如此，智者也会说即作即受，异作异受。你如果认为：两岸是土，中间是水，河神是河，这种说法是不对的！为什么呢？如果神是河，为何又说河水清澈或浑浊，有此岸、彼岸、中间的深浅，流向大海，可以渡过或不能渡过！譬如有一棵树，就有神居住，如果没有树，神住在哪里呢？河与神的关系，也应该如此。因此彼此两岸、中间水流，次第相续不断，总称为河。所以可以说相同与不同，五阴也是如此。 ‘譬如有人谩骂侮辱尊贵之人，因为恶语的缘故，脚被锁上刑具，这脚实际上没有恶语的罪过却被锁上刑具，所以不能断然说：异作异受，即作即受。只有智者才能说：即作即受，异作异受。譬如器皿、油、灯芯、人看护，众多因缘和合才叫做灯明。你如果认为灯明有增减，这种说法是不对的！为什么呢？熄灭了所以没有增加，新来所以没有减少，因为次第产生所以说灯有增减。你如果认为：灯是无常的，油就是常的，油多灯就亮，油少灯就暗，这种说法是不对的！为什么呢？油是无常的，有耗尽、有燃烧，如果它是常的，应该在两个念头之间保持不变；如果在两个念头之间保持不变，谁能燃烧耗尽它呢？所以智者也说：灯明既相同又不同，五阴也是如此。灯明就是六入（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、意六种感觉器官），油就是业，因为油和业的因缘，所以使五阴有增有减，有此有彼。’譬如有人说阿坻耶（过去）语，这阿坻耶已经过去很久了，不在今天，世人相传，次第不灭，所以才称为阿坻耶语。智者也说是阿坻