English
English version: In the concept of ‘Skandha’ (aggregates), apart from Rupa-skandha (the aggregate of form), the other four Skandhas (feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness), although not directly tangible, depend on Rupa-skandha for their existence. If Rupa-skandha is destroyed, the other four will also be destroyed accordingly, just like when a bottle is broken, the water and milk inside will also be lost. Some also say: only the indeterminate Skandha is harmed, because in the indeterminate Skandha, knives and sticks can touch. Since there are two kinds of intangible Skandhas, and three kinds of all Karma, as mentioned earlier, it should be understood.’ Question: ‘In the Sutras (discourses) of the Tathagata (the Buddha), it is said that there are two kinds of Karma: one is initiating Karma, and the other is actual Karma. These two kinds of Karma can be broadly divided into three, namely body Karma, speech Karma, and mind Karma. What is the difference between these three kinds of Karma? Is it from the perspective of what they depend on, or from the perspective of their essence, or from the perspective of their origin? If from the perspective of what they depend on, then it is one Karma, because all Karma depends on the body. If from the perspective of their essence, then it is one Karma, because all Karma is only speech Karma. If from the perspective of their origin, then it is one Karma, because all Karma arises from the mind.’ Answer: ‘According to these three sequences, there are three kinds of Karma. What does this mean? Thinking with the mind is mind Karma, and body and speech Karma arise relying on mind Karma. Because body and speech Karma arise relying on the mind, such a sequence should be understood. The Karma that has been done and the Karma that has not been done should be understood, and the difference between body Karma and speech Karma should be understood. Furthermore, the creator of body Karma relies on the demeanor of the body, and relies on the body to make various forms, which is called body Karma.’ Question: ‘Is the movement of the body, going and coming, called body Karma, and not going and not coming not called Karma?’ Answer: ‘If it is said that going and coming is body Karma, then this statement is not correct. Why? Because all conditioned phenomena (Samskrta, things that are compounded by causes and conditions) do not stay for a moment (Ksana, an extremely short unit of time). Where do things that do not stay for a moment perish? They neither go nor come. How can it be said that going and coming is called body Karma?’ Question: ‘This statement is not correct. Why? If all phenomena do not stay for a moment, it can be said like this, but it is also seen that some phenomena stay for a moment rather than not staying, how can it be said that there is no going and coming?’ Answer: ‘This statement is not correct. Why? Because conditioned phenomena ultimately do not stay. What does this mean? Because all conditioned phenomena, without cause and without condition, spontaneously…’ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
然而灭故。此复何义？以可作法是有因缘而灭，法者即是无物，若无物者彼法不作，以有为法无因无缘自然灭故。若法即生时不灭。后亦不应灭，若不灭者应是定实，若是定实不应变异，若如是者，不应从彼灭因缘灭。” 问曰：“我见有法从因缘灭，如薪等法从彼火等因缘而灭。一切量中现见量胜，以是义故，一切法灭从于因缘。” 答曰：“云何知薪等法依于火等因缘而灭？我言无因自然而灭，此义应思，为因火等薪等法灭故不见耶？为无因缘自然而灭故不见耶？此义云何？本相续因缘灭，余更不生，是故不见，非因缘灭，如风灭灯手灭铃声，如是等知是比智知。” 答曰：“已说非可作事故。此明何义？若有一法从因缘灭，应一切法皆因缘灭，不应有法非因缘灭，犹如生法，一切皆悉从因缘生，无有法生不从因缘，如心声焰非因缘灭，以彼不待因缘灭故。” 问曰：“此义不然。何以故？以后心生前心灭，后声生前声灭，以彼先法待后法故，是故得知从因缘灭。” 答曰：“此义不然。何以故？以彼心声不相待故。此明何义？以有疑知决定知故，二法不俱，苦乐贪恚等皆亦如是。又以前心声疾后心声迟，云何不疾心声而能害彼疾心疾声？是故法灭不从因缘。” 问曰：“ 现代汉语译本：然而（诸法）坏灭的缘故。这又是什么意思呢？因为可造作之法是有因缘而坏灭的，法本身就是无实体的，如果没有实体，那么这个法就不会产生作用。因为有为法没有因缘也会自然坏灭。如果法在产生的时候不坏灭，那么之后也不应该坏灭。如果不坏灭，就应该是恒常真实的，如果是恒常真实的，就不应该变异，如果这样，就不应该从坏灭的因缘而坏灭。 问：我看到有法从因缘而坏灭，比如柴薪等法从火等因缘而坏灭。在一切量（pramana，认识的工具）中，现见量（pratyaksha-pramana，直接感知）最为殊胜，因为这个缘故，一切法的坏灭都是由于因缘。 答：你如何知道柴薪等法依赖于火等因缘而坏灭呢？我说没有因缘也会自然坏灭，这个道理应该思考，是因为火等使柴薪等法坏灭所以看不见了吗？还是因为没有因缘自然坏灭所以看不见呢？这是什么意思呢？原本的相续因缘坏灭，其余的不再产生，所以看不见，不是因为因缘坏灭，比如风灭灯、手灭**，像这样等情况是通过比智（anumana-jnana，推论的智慧）而知晓的。 答：已经说了不是可造作的缘故。这说明什么意思呢？如果有一个法从因缘而坏灭，那么应该一切法都从因缘而坏灭，不应该有法不是从因缘而坏灭，犹如生法，一切都从因缘而生，没有法产生不是从因缘，如心、声、焰不是因缘坏灭，因为它们不依赖于因缘而坏灭。 问：这个道理不对。为什么呢？因为后心生起前心坏灭，后声生起前声坏灭，因为先前的法依赖于后来的法，所以可以得知是从因缘而坏灭。 答：这个道理不对。为什么呢？因为心和声并不互相依赖。这说明什么意思呢？因为有疑惑的认知和决定的认知，这两种法不会同时存在，苦、乐、贪、嗔等也都是这样。而且先前的心声快速，后来的心声缓慢，怎么能让不快速的心声损害快速的心声呢？所以法的坏灭不是从因缘。 问：
English
English version: However, (things) perish. What does this mean again? Because things that can be created perish due to causes and conditions, and the dharma itself is without substance. If there is no substance, then that dharma will not function. Because conditioned dharmas perish naturally without causes and conditions. If a dharma does not perish when it arises, then it should not perish later either. If it does not perish, it should be constant and real. If it is constant and real, it should not change. If so, it should not perish from the causes and conditions of perishing. Question: I see that some dharmas perish from causes and conditions, such as firewood, which perishes from causes and conditions such as fire. Among all pramanas (means of knowledge), pratyaksha-pramana (direct perception) is the most superior. For this reason, the perishing of all dharmas is due to causes and conditions. Answer: How do you know that firewood and other dharmas perish depending on causes and conditions such as fire? I say that they perish naturally without causes. This principle should be considered: is it because fire and other things cause firewood and other dharmas to perish that they are not seen? Or is it because they naturally perish without causes and conditions that they are not seen? What does this mean? The original continuous causes and conditions perish, and nothing else arises, so they are not seen. It is not because of the perishing of causes and conditions, such as a lamp extinguished by wind or ** extinguished by hand. Such things are known through anumana-jnana (inferential knowledge). Answer: It has already been said that it is not something that can be created. What does this mean? If one dharma perishes from causes and conditions, then all dharmas should perish from causes and conditions. There should be no dharma that does not perish from causes and conditions, just like arising dharmas, all of which arise from causes and conditions. There is no dharma that arises not from causes and conditions, such as mind, sound, and flame, which do not perish from causes and conditions, because they do not depend on causes and conditions to perish. Question: This principle is not correct. Why? Because the later mind arises and the former mind perishes, the later sound arises and the former sound perishes. Because the former dharma depends on the latter dharma, it can be known that it perishes from causes and conditions. Answer: This principle is not correct. Why? Because the mind and sound do not depend on each other. What does this mean? Because there is doubtful knowledge and definite knowledge, these two dharmas do not exist simultaneously. Suffering, joy, greed, anger, and so on are all the same. Moreover, the former mind and sound are fast, and the latter mind and sound are slow. How can the slow mind and sound harm the fast mind and sound? Therefore, the perishing of dharmas is not from causes and conditions. Question: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
虽灯与焰念念不住，以无因住而有灭法及灭非法，依彼灭法灭于灯焰，是故应依因缘而灭。” 答曰：“此义不然。何以故？以无物法，云何能作灭因？又生因灭法非法刹那不住，刹那心刹那心中终不能作生因灭因，如是一切有为诸法不从因灭应知。 “又答：若依火等能作薪等灭因，如是生因即是灭因。此明何义？依何等火焰生何等色，即彼火焰能作熟胜、熟胜灭因，以是故即生因是灭因，更无异因。而此义不如是，云何此一法能令法生、能令法灭？又，异异火焰中如是因差别虚妄分别，如因灰汁、苦酒、雪日、地水、谷米能生熟异，熟异等色，彼处云何分别？” 问曰：“不然。何以故？以火煎水，水由火尽，火为灭因。” 答曰：“如向解释，云何得知水因火灭非自然灭？” 问曰：“若尔，火何所作？” 答曰：“火界增上，依彼火力水力渐微，乃至后时水相续体断绝不起，是火所作非火所灭。是故一切有为之法自然而灭，无因缘灭，以彼灭法刹那不住是故即灭，如是成就诸法刹那不住刹那不住，是故此法不彼处去。” 问曰：“我于余处犹见此法，若法不去，云何而得于余处见、于余处识？” 答曰：“如草火焰，是故不去。是故身威仪名身作法，此义 现代汉语译本： 问：虽然灯和火焰念念不停留，因为没有停留的因，所以有灭法（niè fǎ，导致事物消亡的法则）以及灭非法（niè fēi fǎ，非导致事物消亡的法则），依靠那灭法而熄灭灯焰，所以应该依靠因缘而灭亡。 答：这个说法不对。为什么呢？因为没有实体的法，怎么能作为灭亡的原因呢？而且生因（shēng yīn，产生事物的原因）灭法（niè fǎ，导致事物消亡的法则）非法（fēi fǎ，非正法）刹那不停留，刹那心（chà nà xīn，极短时间内的心念）刹那心中终究不能作为生因（shēng yīn，产生事物的原因）灭因（miè yīn，导致事物消亡的原因），像这样一切有为诸法（yǒu wéi zhū fǎ，由因缘和合而成的各种事物）不从因灭应该知道。 又答：如果依靠火等能作为柴等灭亡的原因，这样生因（shēng yīn，产生事物的原因）就是灭因（miè yīn，导致事物消亡的原因）。这说明什么道理？依靠什么样的火焰产生什么样的颜色，就是那火焰能作为成熟胜妙、成熟胜妙灭亡的原因，因此就是生因（shēng yīn，产生事物的原因）是灭因（miè yīn，导致事物消亡的原因），更没有其他的因。而这个道理不是这样，怎么能这一个法能使法产生、能使法灭亡？而且，在不同的火焰中，像这样的因差别是虚妄分别，像因灰汁、苦酒、雪日、地水、谷米能产生成熟不同、成熟不同等的颜色，在那里怎么分别呢？ 问：不对。为什么呢？因为用火煎水，水因为火而干涸，火是灭亡的原因。 答：像先前解释的那样，怎么能知道水因为火而灭亡而不是自然灭亡呢？ 问：如果这样，火做了什么呢？ 答：火界（huǒ jiè，火的元素）增上，依靠那火的力量，水的力量逐渐衰微，乃至后来水相续的本体断绝不再产生，这是火所做的，不是火所灭亡的。因此，一切有为之法（yǒu wéi zhī fǎ，由因缘和合而成的各种事物）自然而灭亡，没有因缘灭亡，因为那灭法（niè fǎ，导致事物消亡的法则）刹那不停留所以立即灭亡，像这样成就诸法刹那不停留刹那不停留，因此这个法不往别处去。 问：我在其他地方仍然看到这个法，如果法不去，怎么能在其他地方看到、在其他地方认识呢？ 答：像草的火焰一样，因此不去。因此，身体的威仪叫做身作法（shēn zuò fǎ，身体的行为），这个道理...