English
English version If the past and future two minds are combined with the present mind, then either the past and future train the present, or the present trains the past and future. If it is said that the past and future train the present, then it should not be said that the present is being trained; if it is said that the present is being trained, this statement is unreasonable. If it is said that neither the past, future, nor present are being trained, then it is tantamount to slandering, violating, and denying the Buddha's (Śākyamuni's) excellent words, phrases, and teachings in the scriptures—the Buddha (Śākyamuni) used his teeth to hold his teeth, his tongue tip against his palate, and used his mind to subdue, hold, and train his mind. You slander, violate, and deny such scriptures spoken by the Buddha (Śākyamuni), which is unreasonable. The Śrāmaṇa Maudgalyāyana says: The past and future do not exist, only the present unconditioned dharma exists. One should ask him: Do you agree with this statement? In the scriptures, the Buddha (Śākyamuni), with excellent words, phrases, and teachings, spoke to the bhikṣu Puṣkarasāri about the eighteen mental tendencies, calling them a puruṣa. He replied: Yes. Ask him again: Āyuṣmat! When the eye sees a color and then follows the pleasing colors, giving rise to various mental tendencies, in which time period should the remaining seventeen mental tendencies be said to exist? Past, future, or present? If it is said to be in the past, then it should be said that there is a past, and it should not be said that there is no past; saying that there is no past is unreasonable. If it is said to be in the future, then it should be said that there is a future, and it should not be said that there is no future; saying that there is no future is unreasonable. If it is said to be in the present, then it should be said that there is a pudgala, and without any sequence, the eighteen mental tendencies occur simultaneously, which is unreasonable. If it is said that there is no pudgala, and without any sequence, the eighteen mental tendencies occur simultaneously, then it should not be said that the mental tendencies exist in the present; saying that they exist in the present is unreasonable. If it is said that they are not in the past, future, or present, then it is tantamount to slandering, violating, and denying the Buddha's (Śākyamuni's) excellent words, phrases, and teachings in the scriptures, spoken to the bhikṣu Puṣkarasāri about the eighteen mental tendencies, calling them a puruṣa. You slander, violate, and deny such scriptures spoken by the Buddha (Śākyamuni), which is unreasonable. Vijñānakāya-pāda, Maudgalyāyana-skandha, First Section, Fourth Udāna -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 颂初 无所缘静虑， 异生大士羞， 宣说有情居， 食圣谛断漏。
Chinese
沙门目连作如是说：有无所缘心。应问彼言：汝然此不？谓契经中世尊善语善词善说，苾刍了别，了别故名为识。何所了别？谓了别色，了别声香味触法。彼答言：尔。汝听堕负。若汝说有无所缘心，则不应言谓契经中世尊善语善词善说，苾刍了别了别故名为识。何所了别？谓了别色了别声香味触法。作如是言不应道理。汝今若言谓契经中世尊善语善词善说，苾刍了别了别故名为识。何所了别？谓了别色了别声香味触法。则不应说有无所缘心；言有无所缘心，不应道理。彼作是言：无所缘心决定是有。何者是耶？谓缘过去或缘未来。应问彼言：汝然此不？谓契经中世尊善语善词善说，为本鱼师莎底苾刍说言，苾刍由彼彼因、由彼彼缘发生于识，识既生已堕彼彼数。由眼及色发生于识，识既生已堕眼识数。由耳鼻舌身意及法发生于识，识既生已堕意识数。彼答言：尔。汝听堕负。若汝说言无所缘心决定是有，则不应言谓契经中世尊善语善词善说，为本鱼师莎底苾刍说言，苾刍！由彼彼因、由彼彼缘发生于识，识既生已堕彼彼数。由眼及色发生于识，识既生已堕眼识数。由耳鼻舌身意及法发生于识，识既生已堕意识数。作如是言，不应 现代汉语译本 颂初 不以任何事物为所缘的禅定，是凡夫俗子和大菩萨都感到羞愧的。 宣说有情众生所居住之处，以食用圣谛来断除烦恼。 沙门（Śrāmaṇa，出家修道者）目连（Maudgalyāyana，佛陀十大弟子之一，以神通著称）这样说：存在没有所缘的心。应该问他：你认可这个说法吗？因为在契经（Sūtra，佛经）中，世尊（Śākyamuni，释迦牟尼佛）善妙地说了这些话，比丘（bhikṣu，出家男众）能够了别，因为能够了别所以称为识（vijñāna，意识）。了别什么呢？了别色（rūpa，颜色、形状），了别声（śabda，声音），香（gandha，气味），味（rasa，味道），触（sparśa，触感），法（dharma，事物、规律）。他回答说：是的，我认可。那么你听着，你已经自相矛盾了。如果你说存在没有所缘的心，那么就不应该说在契经中，世尊善妙地说了这些话，比丘能够了别，因为能够了别所以称为识。了别什么呢？了别色，了别声香味触法。这样说是没有道理的。你现在如果说在契经中，世尊善妙地说了这些话，比丘能够了别，因为能够了别所以称为识。了别什么呢？了别色，了别声香味触法。那么就不应该说存在没有所缘的心；说存在没有所缘的心，是没有道理的。他这样说：没有所缘的心肯定是存在的。那是什么呢？是缘过去或者缘未来的心。应该问他：你认可这个说法吗？因为在契经中，世尊善妙地说了这些话，为本鱼师莎底（Sāti，人名）比丘说，比丘！由于这个这个因，由于这个这个缘，才产生了识，识产生之后就归于这个这个类别。由于眼（cakṣu，视觉器官）和色（rūpa，颜色、形状）才产生了识，识产生之后就归于眼识（cakṣurvijñāna，视觉意识）的类别。由于耳（śrotra，听觉器官）、鼻（ghrāṇa，嗅觉器官）、舌（jihvā，味觉器官）、身（kāya，身体）、意（manas，思维器官）以及法（dharma，事物、规律）才产生了识，识产生之后就归于意识（manovijñāna，思维意识）的类别。他回答说：是的，我认可。那么你听着，你已经自相矛盾了。如果你说没有所缘的心肯定是存在的，那么就不应该说在契经中，世尊善妙地说了这些话，为本鱼师莎底比丘说，比丘！由于这个这个因，由于这个这个缘，才产生了识，识产生之后就归于这个这个类别。由于眼和色才产生了识，识产生之后就归于眼识的类别。由于耳鼻舌身意以及法才产生了识，识产生之后就归于意识的类别。这样说，是不应该的。
English
English version Verses at the Beginning Dhyana (meditative absorption) without an object of focus, Is something that even ordinary beings and great Bodhisattvas (enlightenment beings) would be ashamed of. Declaring where sentient beings reside, Cutting off outflows by consuming the Noble Truths (āryasatya). The Śrāmaṇa (ascetic) Maudgalyāyana (one of the Buddha's ten great disciples, known for his supernatural powers) spoke thus: 'There exists a mind without an object of focus.' One should ask him: 'Do you affirm this?' Because in the Sutras (discourses), the World Honored One (Śākyamuni Buddha) spoke well, with good words and good explanations, that a bhikṣu (monk) discerns, and because of discerning, it is called vijñāna (consciousness). What does he discern? He discerns rūpa (form, color), discerns śabda (sound), gandha (smell), rasa (taste), sparśa (touch), and dharma (phenomena, principles).' He answers: 'Yes, I affirm this.' Then listen, you have fallen into contradiction. If you say there exists a mind without an object of focus, then you should not say that in the Sutras, the World Honored One spoke well, with good words and good explanations, that a bhikṣu discerns, and because of discerning, it is called vijñāna. What does he discern? He discerns rūpa, discerns śabda, gandha, rasa, sparśa, and dharma. To say this is unreasonable. If you now say that in the Sutras, the World Honored One spoke well, with good words and good explanations, that a bhikṣu discerns, and because of discerning, it is called vijñāna. What does he discern? He discerns rūpa, discerns śabda, gandha, rasa, sparśa, and dharma. Then you should not say there exists a mind without an object of focus; to say there exists a mind without an object of focus is unreasonable. He says thus: 'A mind without an object of focus definitely exists. What is it?' It is the mind that focuses on the past or focuses on the future. One should ask him: 'Do you affirm this?' Because in the Sutras, the World Honored One spoke well, with good words and good explanations, to the bhikṣu Sāti (personal name), the son of a fisherman, saying, 'Bhikṣu! Due to this and this cause, due to this and this condition, vijñāna arises, and once vijñāna arises, it falls into this and this category. Due to the eye (cakṣu, visual organ) and rūpa (form, color), vijñāna arises, and once vijñāna arises, it falls into the category of eye-consciousness (cakṣurvijñāna, visual consciousness). Due to the ear (śrotra, auditory organ), nose (ghrāṇa, olfactory organ), tongue (jihvā, gustatory organ), body (kāya, physical body), mind (manas, mental organ), and dharma (phenomena, principles), vijñāna arises, and once vijñāna arises, it falls into the category of mind-consciousness (manovijñāna, mental consciousness).' He answers: 'Yes, I affirm this.' Then listen, you have fallen into contradiction. If you say a mind without an object of focus definitely exists, then you should not say that in the Sutras, the World Honored One spoke well, with good words and good explanations, to the bhikṣu Sāti, the son of a fisherman, saying, 'Bhikṣu! Due to this and this cause, due to this and this condition, vijñāna arises, and once vijñāna arises, it falls into this and this category. Due to the eye and rūpa, vijñāna arises, and once vijñāna arises, it falls into the category of eye-consciousness. Due to the ear, nose, tongue, body, mind, and dharma, vijñāna arises, and once vijñāna arises, it falls into the category of mind-consciousness.' To say this is unreasonable. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
道理。汝今若言谓契经中世尊善语善词善说，为本鱼师莎底苾刍说言，苾刍！由彼彼因、由彼彼缘发生于识，识既生已堕彼彼数。由眼及色发生于识，识既生已堕眼识数。由耳鼻舌身意及法发生于识，识既生已堕意识数。则不应说无所缘心决定是有；言决定有无所缘心，不应道理。 沙门目连作如是说：过去未来无，现在无为有。应问彼言：汝然此不？若有惭羞、恶作防护、爱乐所学、久居善处，证得世间四种静虑。彼答言：尔。即彼具寿临终时分，有诸识达同梵行者来诣问言：具寿！当记自所证得。彼作是言：具寿！我今已得世间四种静虑。应问彼言：即彼具寿记何所证，过去耶、未来耶、现在耶？若言记过去，应说有过去，不应无过去；言过去无，不应道理。若言记未来，应说有未来，不应无未来；言未来无，不应道理。若言记现在，应说有一补特伽罗，非前非后二心和合，一是所记、一是能记，又在定中应说异语，此不应理。若不说一补特伽罗，非前非后二心和合，一是所记、一是能记，又在定中不说异语，则不应言记于现在；言记现在，不应道理。若言不记过去、未来、现在，是则空无胜过人法，自称言有，彼应毁坏。 沙门目连作如是说：过去未来无，现在无为有。应问彼言：汝然此不？谓契 现代汉语译本：道理。你现在如果说契经（Sutra）中世尊（Lord Buddha）所说的善语、善词、善说，是为本鱼师莎底苾刍（Sati Bhiksu, a fisherman-turned-monk）所说，说：‘苾刍（Bhiksu, monk）！由于种种因、种种缘而生起识（consciousness），识一旦生起就归属于那些类别。由眼和色（form）而生起识，识一旦生起就归属于眼识（eye-consciousness）的类别。由耳、鼻、舌、身、意和法（dharma）而生起识，识一旦生起就归属于意识（mind-consciousness）的类别。’那么就不应该说无所缘的心（mind without object）一定是存在的；说一定存在无所缘的心，是不合道理的。 沙门目连（Maudgalyayana, one of the Buddha's chief disciples）这样说：过去和未来不存在，现在和无为法（unconditioned dharma）存在。应该问他：‘你认可这个说法吗？’如果他有惭愧心、有防止恶行的防护、喜爱学习、长期居住在善处，并且证得了世间的四种静虑（four dhyanas, meditative states）。他回答说：‘认可。’当这位具寿（Ayushman, venerable one）临终的时候，有些有神通的同修前来问他：‘具寿（Ayushman）！请记住你所证得的境界。’他这样说：‘具寿（Ayushman）！我现在已经证得了世间的四种静虑（four dhyanas）。’应该问他：‘这位具寿（Ayushman）所记住的是什么证悟，是过去的、未来的、还是现在的？’如果他说记住的是过去的，就应该说过去存在，不应该说过去不存在；说过去不存在，是不合道理的。如果他说记住的是未来的，就应该说未来存在，不应该说未来不存在；说未来不存在，是不合道理的。如果他说记住的是现在的，就应该说存在一个补特伽罗（Pudgala, person），不是前一个心也不是后一个心，两个心和合在一起，一个是所记住的，一个是能记住的，而且在禅定中应该说不同的语言，这不合道理。如果不是说一个补特伽罗（Pudgala），不是前一个心也不是后一个心，两个心和合在一起，一个是所记住的，一个是能记住的，而且在禅定中不说不同的语言，那么就不应该说记住的是现在的；说记住的是现在的，是不合道理的。如果他说不记住过去、未来、现在，那么就是空无胜过常人的人法（superior human qualities），自己却声称拥有，他应该被谴责。 沙门目连（Maudgalyayana）这样说：过去和未来不存在，现在和无为法（unconditioned dharma）存在。应该问他：‘你认可这个说法吗？’所谓契