English
English version: Seven is 'similarity in result'. Eight is 'similarity in pervasiveness'. Nine is 'dissimilarity in pervasiveness'. Ten is 'similarity in time'. Eleven is 'not reaching'. Twelve is 'name reaching'. Thirteen is 'contradiction'. Fourteen is 'non-contradiction'. Fifteen is 'doubt'. Sixteen is 'non-doubt'. Seventeen is 'the analogy is refuted'. Eighteen is 'similarity in hearing'. Nineteen is 'difference in hearing'. Twenty is 'non-arising'. These are called the twenty methods of questions and answers. Question: These twenty methods should be explained separately. Answer: 'Increase' refers to, for example, saying 'I am permanent because I am not perceived by the senses (根, root senses)'. Space (虚空, xū kōng) is not perceived, therefore it is permanent. Everything that is not perceived by the senses should be permanent. And I am not perceived by the senses, so am I not permanent?' The rebuttal says: 'Space has no consciousness, therefore it is permanent. I have consciousness, how can you say I am permanent? If space had consciousness, that would be unreasonable. If I had no consciousness, I could be like space. If I have consciousness, I must be impermanent.' This is called 'increase'. 'Decrease' refers to, if space has no consciousness and I have consciousness, how can you use space to compare me? This is called 'decrease'. 'Similarity and difference' refers to, if you posit that I am permanent, citing space as an analogy. If space and I are the same, then using one dharma (法, dharma), how can you use space to compare me? If space and I are different, then you cannot use each other as analogies. This is called 'similarity and difference'. Furthermore, you posit that I am permanent, saying it is because I am not perceived by the senses. Like space is not perceived by the senses, therefore it is permanent. However, not being perceived by the senses does not necessarily mean everything is permanent, how can you use that as proof? This is called 'asking much, answering little'. Furthermore, you posit that I am permanent, saying it is because I am not perceived by the senses. There are two kinds of dharmas that are not perceived by the senses. Dust particles are not perceived, but are impermanent. Space is not perceived, but is a permanent dharma. How can you say that because it is not perceived, therefore it is permanent? This is called the fifth kind of 'asking little, answering much'. Furthermore, you use not being perceived as the reason, therefore you know I am permanent. Space and I are different, how can you both use not being perceived as the reason? This is called 'similarity in cause'. Furthermore, everything made of the five great elements (五大, wǔ dà - earth, water, fire, wind, space) is impermanent. Space and I are also made of the five great elements, how can you say it is permanent? This is called 'similarity in result'. Furthermore, you use space not being perceived, therefore it is permanent. However, space pervades everywhere, are the things in every place not perceived? This is called 'similarity in pervasiveness'. Furthermore, dust particles are not pervasive, and are not perceived by the senses, and are impermanent dharmas. I am not perceived by the senses, how can I be permanent? This is called 'dissimilarity in pervasiveness'. Furthermore, you posit that I am permanent, saying it is because I am not a root --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
觉。为是现在过去未来。若言过去过去已灭。若言未来未来未有。若言现在则不为因。如二角并生。则不得相因。是名时因。复次汝立我常以非根觉。到故为因。为不到乎。若不到则不成因。如火不到则不能烧。如刀不到则不能割。不到于我。云何为因。是名不到。复次若到因者。到便即是无有因义。是名为到。复次汝以一切无常。我非一切故常者。我即是有故应无常。如㲲少烧。以多不烧应名不烧。是名相违。复次汝以我非根觉同于虚空。虚空不觉我亦应尔。若我觉者虚空亦应觉于苦乐。虚空与我无有异故。是不相违。复次我同有故不定为常。容可生疑。为常无常。是名为疑。复次汝言有我非根所觉。则可生疑。有何障故非根觉耶。当说因缘。若无因缘。我义自坏。是名不疑。复次汝以我非根觉故为常者。树根地下水亦非根觉而是无常。我云何常。是名喻破。复次汝以经说。我非觉故知是常者。经中亦说无我我所。尼干法中明我非常。我定常者。诸经不应有异有同。是名闻同。复次若汝信一经。以我为常。亦应信余经我为无常。若二信者。一我便应亦常无常。是名闻异。复次汝以有因知有我者。娑罗树子既是有故应生多罗。若以无故而知无者。多罗子中无树形相。不应得生。若有亦不生。无亦不生。我亦如是。若定 现代汉语译本 觉（觉知）。是为了现在、过去、未来而设立的。如果说是过去，过去已经灭亡。如果说是未来，未来尚未产生。如果说是现在，现在则不能作为原因。如同两个角同时生长，则不能互相作为原因。这叫做时因。 再次，你认为‘我’是常，因为‘我’不是根觉所能觉知的，所以到达‘我’是作为原因。那么是到达了呢，还是没有到达呢？如果没有到达，则不能成为原因。如同火没有到达就不能燃烧，如同刀没有到达就不能切割。没有到达‘我’，怎么能作为原因呢？这叫做不到。 再次，如果到达是原因，那么到达就意味着没有原因的意义。这叫做到达。 再次，你认为一切都是无常的，而‘我’不是一切，所以是常。那么‘我’就是存在的，所以应该是无常的。如同毡毯烧了一点点，因为大部分没有烧，就应该叫做没有烧。这叫做相违。 再次，你认为‘我’不是根觉所能觉知的，如同虚空一样。虚空不能觉知，‘我’也应该如此。如果‘我’能觉知，虚空也应该能觉知苦乐。因为虚空和‘我’没有区别。这叫做不相违。 再次，‘我’和有相同，所以不能确定是常。容许产生怀疑，是常还是无常。这叫做疑。 再次，你说有‘我’不是根所能觉知的，那么可以产生怀疑，有什么障碍导致根不能觉知‘我’呢？应当说明原因。如果没有原因，‘我’的意义自然就破灭了。这叫做不疑。 再次，你认为‘我’不是根觉所能觉知的，所以是常。那么树根在地下的水也不是根觉所能觉知的，但是却是无常的。‘我’怎么能是常呢？这叫做比喻破。 再次，你认为经典上说，‘我’不是觉知，所以知道是常。经典中也说没有‘我’和‘我所’。尼干（Nigantha）的教法中说明‘我’不是常。如果‘我’一定是常，那么诸经就不应该有不同和相同。这叫做闻同。 再次，如果你相信一部经典，认为‘我’是常，也应该相信其他经典，认为‘我’是无常。如果两部都相信，那么一个‘我’就应该既是常又是无常。这叫做闻异。 再次，你认为因为有因而知道有‘我’。那么娑罗树（Śāla）的种子既然是有的，就应该能生出多罗树（Tāla）。如果因为没有而知道没有，那么多罗树的种子中没有树的形状，就不应该能生长。如果有也不能生长，没有也不能生长，‘我’也是这样。如果一定...
English
English version Consciousness (覺, Jue, awareness). Is it established for the present, past, or future? If you say it is past, the past has already ceased. If you say it is future, the future has not yet arisen. If you say it is present, then it cannot be a cause. It is like two horns growing simultaneously, which cannot be the cause of each other. This is called the cause of time (時因, shí yīn). Furthermore, you assert that the 'self' (我, wǒ) is permanent because it is not perceived by the sense faculties (根覺, gēn jué), therefore, reaching the 'self' is considered a cause. Has it been reached or not? If it has not been reached, then it cannot be a cause. Just as fire cannot burn if it does not reach, just as a knife cannot cut if it does not reach. If it does not reach the 'self,' how can it be a cause? This is called non-reaching (不到, bù dào). Furthermore, if reaching is the cause, then reaching implies the absence of a cause. This is called reaching (到, dào). Furthermore, you assert that everything is impermanent, but the 'self' is not everything, therefore it is permanent. Then the 'self' is existent, so it should be impermanent. It is like a felt blanket that is slightly burned; because most of it is not burned, it should be called unburned. This is called contradiction (相違, xiāng wéi). Furthermore, you assert that the 'self' is not perceived by the sense faculties, just like space (虛空, xū kōng). Space cannot perceive, so the 'self' should also be like that. If the 'self' can perceive, then space should also be able to perceive suffering and happiness. Because space and the 'self' are not different. This is called non-contradiction (不相違, bù xiāng wéi). Furthermore, the 'self' is the same as existence, so it cannot be determined as permanent. Doubt may arise, whether it is permanent or impermanent. This is called doubt (疑, yí). Furthermore, you say that there is a 'self' that is not perceived by the sense faculties, then doubt can arise. What obstacle prevents the sense faculties from perceiving the 'self'? The cause should be explained. If there is no cause, the meaning of the 'self' will naturally be destroyed. This is called non-doubt (不疑, bù yí). Furthermore, you assert that the 'self' is permanent because it is not perceived by the sense faculties. Then the water under the ground near the roots of a tree is also not perceived by the sense faculties, but it is impermanent. How can the 'self' be permanent? This is called refutation by analogy (喻破, yù pò). Furthermore, you assert that the scriptures say that the 'self' is not awareness, so it is known to be permanent. The scriptures also say that there is no 'self' and no 'belonging to self' (我所, wǒ suǒ). The teachings of the Niganthas (尼干, Nigantha) explain that the 'self' is not permanent. If the 'self' is definitely permanent, then the scriptures should not have differences and similarities. This is called hearing the same (聞同, wén tóng). Furthermore, if you believe one scripture that says the 'self' is permanent, you should also believe other scriptures that say the 'self' is impermanent. If you believe both, then one 'self' should be both permanent and impermanent. This is called hearing differently (聞異, wén yì). Furthermore, you assert that because there is a cause, you know there is a 'self.' Then the seed of the Śāla tree (娑羅樹, Śāla) since it exists, should be able to produce a Tāla tree (多羅樹, Tāla). If you know there is nothing because there is no cause, then the seed of the Tāla tree does not have the shape of a tree, so it should not be able to grow. If it exists, it cannot grow; if it does not exist, it cannot grow. The 'self' is also like that. If definitely... --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
有者。不须以根不觉为因。我若定无。以根不觉不可令有。是名不生。若复有人立声是常。亦以如上二十种法同异破之。 问曰。此二十种。更有因缘自解说耶。答曰自有。应当问言。由有我故汝破于我。若无我者汝何所破。以有能破故有所破。 难曰。理实无我。汝横计为有故我难汝。汝言以有所破故有我者。以有能破故知无我。若言汝执我义以明无我。是事不然。非用汝义。今汝自用我所执耳。立曰。汝云何知我执汝义。应说因缘。难曰。我前已言。非执汝义汝执他立。何故复问。云何知我执汝义耶。汝言自违即堕负处。又汝初以根不觉故知实有我。后以众法而为证明。立因不定违失义宗。亦堕负处。汝义已坏。我若更说不出于初。受言多过。凡问答者。答极至于五。过此更言皆名为过。若有智慧思惟深理。广说譬喻能解于义。然其所论不出此法。论者言。已说如上诸说法要。此论要者。诸论之本。由此论故广生问答增长智慧。譬如种子若遇良地根茎滋茂。若种恶田无有果实。此法亦尔。若有智慧能善思量。则广生诸论。若愚痴人少于智慧。虽习此论不能通达。是则不名真善知见。是故诸有欲生实智分别善恶。当勤修习此正法论。 方便心论一卷 现代汉语译本：有些人认为，不需要以根的不觉作为原因。如果我确定没有‘我’，那么就不能因为根的不觉而强行说有‘我’。这叫做‘不生’。如果又有人主张声音是常存的，也可以用上面提到的二十种方法，从相同和不同的角度来驳斥他。 问：这二十种方法，还有其他的因缘可以自己解释吗？答：有。你应该这样问：因为有‘我’的缘故，你才来驳斥我。如果没有‘我’，你又驳斥什么呢？因为有能驳斥的，所以才有被驳斥的。 反驳：实际上没有‘我’，是你自己错误地认为有‘我’，所以我才反驳你。你说因为有被驳斥的，所以有‘我’，那么因为有能驳斥的，就知道没有‘我’。如果说你坚持‘我’的意义来证明没有‘我’，这是不对的。我不是用你的意义，而是用我自己所坚持的。立论者说：你怎么知道我坚持你的意义？应该说明原因。反驳：我前面已经说了，我不是坚持你的意义，而是坚持其他人所立的观点。为什么还要问，怎么知道我坚持你的意义呢？你自己的话自相矛盾，已经处于失败的境地。而且你一开始用根的不觉来证明确实有‘我’，后来又用各种方法来证明。你所立的因不稳定，违背了你自己的宗旨，也已经处于失败的境地。你的理论已经崩溃。我如果再说，也超不出你最初的说法，只会多说无益。一般来说，问答的次数最多到五次。超过这个次数再说，都叫做多余。如果有智慧的人，能够深入思考其中的道理，广泛地运用比喻来理解其中的意义，那么他所讨论的内容也不会超出这些方法。论者说：我已经说了如上各种说法的要点。这些论述的要点，是各种论述的根本。通过这些论述，可以广泛地产生问答，增长智慧。譬如种子如果遇到肥沃的土地，根茎就会茂盛。如果种在贫瘠的土地上，就不会有果实。这个法也是这样。如果有智慧的人，能够很好地思考，就能广泛地产生各种论述。如果愚痴的人，缺少智慧，即使学习这些论述，也不能通达。这样的人就不能称为真正的好知识、好见解。所以，凡是想要产生真实的智慧，分辨善恶的人，都应当勤奋地修习这部正法论。 《方便心论》一卷