English
English version: 'No non-Dharma-aspects' refers to ignorant people mistakenly believing that the Perfected Nature (yuan cheng shi xing) is empty and calling it 'non-Dharma-aspects'. Because emptiness has no substance. Wise people understand that this Perfected Nature exists, so there are no 'non-Dharma-aspects'. Because they are not attached to viewing it as an empty aspect. 'The principle of no-self' (wu wo li) is real, so here it should be said 'no-aspect and also not no-aspect'. Saying 'no-aspect' means that 'the principle of no-self' cannot be expressed in words as existence or non-existence. Some junior Bodhisattvas initially think it can be described in words, calling it 'aspect'. Sages understand that it is inexpressible, so they say 'no-aspect'. 'Also not no-aspect' means that in a place where language cannot be used, the aspect of language is borrowed to explain it. Ignorant people, upon hearing that it is inexpressible, think that all words are wrong. Wise people understand this, so they borrow words to explain it, but they are not attached to words, so they say 'also not no-aspect'. Why is that? 'If these beings grasp at aspects in their minds, they are attached to self, person, being, and life'. Explanation: The previous explanation of not being attached to emptiness and existence is divided into general and specific explanations. This is the general explanation. 'If one grasps at Dharma-aspects, one is attached to self, person, being, and life. Why? If one grasps at non-Dharma-aspects, one is attached to self, person, being, and life'. Explanation: This is the specific explanation. It means that if one is attached to Dharma, thinking that the self exists, then one is attached to self and person. If one is attached to the Perfected Nature as empty, one is also attached to person and self. 'Grasping' means attachment. Removing both attachments simultaneously is in accordance with the Middle Way. Therefore, it is said 'no Dharma-aspects and also no non-Dharma-aspects', which is to be free from the two attachments. Therefore, the verse says that everything is empty and without substance, and that the self of person and the self of Dharma do not exist. What truly exists is the substance of 'the principle of no-self', which is not empty. 'Inexpressible' means that it cannot be expressed in words as existence or non-existence. The Dharma-nature (fa xing) is beyond language, and 'explaining it with words' is easy to understand. Furthermore, it is said 'If one grasps at Dharma-aspects, one is attached to self, person, etc.' What does this mean? Even if there is only the latent influence of ignorance (wu ming), without the manifest coarse afflictions, and without self-view (wo jian)? The explanation is that 'only the influence of ignorance' refers to the ground of ignorance (wu ming zhu di), which is the discriminating attachment to Dharma. 'Without manifest coarse afflictions' means that there are no manifest afflictive obstructions (fan nao zhang). There are only seeds following. The meaning here is that because there is the manifestation of Dharma-attachment, afflictive obstructions arise accordingly. Asanga's *Mahāyānasaṃgraha* also says that in the thought of self. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
随眠不断故则为有我取。是故经言是诸众生若取法相则为着我等。意亦同世亲也。由法执取法相故我等便生故。 是故不应取法不应取非法。 述曰。此释第二依言离言相也。不应取法者不应如声取法谓。不如言而取故。不应取非法者随顺第一义智正说。如是取者谓必因言而悟真故。 是故如来“常说汝等比丘知我说法如筏喻者法尚应舍”何况非法。 述曰。此结成筏喻也。谓将欲证真必因言说。及其正证即不假言。如筏至岸即无所用也。上来依世亲释竟。依无著者论云此取显示实相对治五种邪取故。何者五取。一者外道。二者内法凡夫及声闻。三者增上慢菩萨。四者世间共想定。五者无想定。第一者我等想转第二者法相转。第三者无法相转。此犹有法取。有法取者谓取无法故。第四者有想转谓执有想定。第五者无想转执无想定故。是诸菩萨于彼皆不转也。于中言生实想者此为依义显示对治不实想。故言于此修多罗章句中者此为说相。显示言说法身故。即彼当生实想中。言当生者是欲愿摄持。是诸菩萨。无复我想转等者是安立第一义。不应取法非法者显了也。 须菩提“于意云何如来得阿耨多罗三藐三菩提耶如来”有所说法耶。 述曰。依世亲此破第三疑也。谓有疑曰上言无想 现代汉语译本：随眠（Anusaya，烦恼的潜在倾向）不断，就会执着于我见（Atma-graha，认为有‘我’的观念）。因此，经书上说，如果这些众生执着于法相（Dharma-lakshana，法的表象），那就是执着于我等（Atma-samana，与‘我’相关的概念）。这与世亲（Vasubandhu，一位佛教哲学家）的观点是一致的，因为由于对法的执着，以及对法相的执取，我等（Atma-samana）便会产生。 因此，不应该执取法，也不应该执取非法。 述曰：这是解释第二种依言离言相（依靠言语，但超越言语的境界）。不应该执取法，就是不应该像执着声音一样执着于法，也就是说，不要按照字面意思去理解法。不应该执取非法，则是随顺第一义智（Paramartha-jnana，对最高真理的智慧）的正确说法。像这样执取的人，必定会因为言语而领悟真理。 因此，如来（Tathagata，佛的称号）常说：‘你们这些比丘（Bhikkhu，佛教僧侣），要知道我说法就像筏（筏，渡河的工具）的比喻一样，法尚且应该舍弃’，何况非法呢？ 述曰：这是总结筏喻（筏的比喻）。意思是说，想要证悟真理，必须依靠言语。等到真正证悟时，就不需要言语了。就像筏子到了岸边，就没有用处了一样。以上是依据世亲（Vasubandhu）的解释。依据无著（Asanga，一位佛教哲学家）的《论》说，这种执取显示了与实相对治的五种邪取（错误的执取）。哪五种邪取呢？第一种是外道（Tirthika，非佛教徒）。第二种是内法凡夫（Prthag-jana，未开悟的普通人）以及声闻（Sravaka，通过听闻佛法而证悟的弟子）。第三种是增上慢菩萨（Adhimanika-bodhisattva，自以为是的菩萨）。第四种是世间共想定（Laukika-samatha-dhyana，世俗的禅定）。第五种是无想定（Asanjnika-samapatti，无想的禅定）。第一种是我等想转（Atma-samana-samvarta，与‘我’相关的概念的转变），第二种是法相转（Dharma-lakshana-samvarta，法的表象的转变），第三种是无法相转（Adharma-lakshana-samvarta，非法的表象的转变）。这仍然有法取（Dharma-graha，对法的执取）。有法取的人，是执取无法（Adharma，非法）的缘故。第四种是有想转（Sanjna-samvarta，有想的转变），是执着于有想定（Sanjnika-samapatti，有想的禅定）。第五种是无想转（Asanjna-samvarta，无想的转变），是执着于无想定（Asanjnika-samapatti，无想的禅定）的缘故。这些菩萨（Bodhisattva，追求觉悟的修行者）对于这些都不转变。其中说产生实想（Satya-samjna，真实的观念）的人，这是依据意义显示对治不实想（Asatya-samjna，不真实的观念）。所以说，‘在这个修多罗（Sutra，佛经）的章句中’，这是说相（Lakshana，相状），显示言说法身（Dharma-kaya，法的身体）的缘故。就在那将要产生实想中，说‘将要产生’，这是欲愿摄持（Chanda-samgraha，愿望的摄取）。‘这些菩萨，没有我想转等’，这是安立第一义（Paramartha，最高真理），不应该执取法非法，就显明了。 须菩提（Subhuti，佛陀的弟子）啊，‘你的意思怎么样？如来（Tathagata）得到阿耨多罗三藐三菩提（Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi，无上正等正觉）了吗？如来’有所说法吗？ 述曰：依据世亲（Vasubandhu）的观点，这是为了破除第三种疑惑。有人怀疑说，上面说没有想。
English
English version: If the Anusaya (latent tendencies of afflictions) is not ceased, then there will be attachment to Atma-graha (the notion of 'self'). Therefore, the scriptures say that if these beings are attached to Dharma-lakshana (the appearance of Dharma), then they are attached to Atma-samana (concepts related to 'self'). This is consistent with the view of Vasubandhu (a Buddhist philosopher), because due to attachment to Dharma and grasping of Dharma-lakshana, Atma-samana arises. Therefore, one should not grasp Dharma, nor should one grasp Adharma (non-Dharma). Commentary: This explains the second aspect of relying on words but transcending them. 'One should not grasp Dharma' means one should not grasp Dharma like clinging to sound, that is, do not understand Dharma literally. 'One should not grasp Adharma' is the correct statement in accordance with Paramartha-jnana (wisdom of the highest truth). Those who grasp in this way will surely realize the truth through words. Therefore, the Tathagata (Buddha's title) often said: 'You Bhikkhus (Buddhist monks), know that my teaching is like a raft (a tool for crossing a river), even Dharma should be abandoned', let alone Adharma? Commentary: This is a summary of the raft analogy. It means that to realize the truth, one must rely on words. When one truly realizes it, words are no longer needed. Just like a raft is no longer needed once it reaches the shore. The above is based on Vasubandhu's explanation. According to Asanga's (a Buddhist philosopher) 'Treatise', this grasping reveals the five kinds of wrong grasping that counteract the real. What are the five wrong grasps? The first is Tirthika (non-Buddhists). The second is Prthag-jana (unenlightened ordinary people) and Sravaka (disciples who attain enlightenment through hearing the Dharma). The third is Adhimanika-bodhisattva (arrogant Bodhisattvas). The fourth is Laukika-samatha-dhyana (worldly samatha meditation). The fifth is Asanjnika-samapatti (meditation of non-perception). The first is Atma-samana-samvarta (transformation of concepts related to 'self'), the second is Dharma-lakshana-samvarta (transformation of the appearance of Dharma), and the third is Adharma-lakshana-samvarta (transformation of the appearance of non-Dharma). This still has Dharma-graha (grasping of Dharma). Those who grasp Dharma do so because they grasp Adharma (non-Dharma). The fourth is Sanjna-samvarta (transformation of perception), which is attachment to Sanjnika-samapatti (meditation of perception). The fifth is Asanjna-samvarta (transformation of non-perception), which is attachment to Asanjnika-samapatti (meditation of non-perception). These Bodhisattvas (practitioners seeking enlightenment) do not transform in these. Among them, saying that one generates Satya-samjna (true notion) is based on meaning to show the counteraction of Asatya-samjna (untrue notion). Therefore, 'in this Sutra (Buddhist scripture) chapter and verse', this is Lakshana (characteristics), showing the Dharma-kaya (Dharma body) of speech. In that which is about to generate true thought, saying 'about to generate' is Chanda-samgraha (gathering of aspirations). 'These Bodhisattvas, without the transformation of self-thought, etc.', this is establishing Paramartha (highest truth), and it is clear that one should not grasp Dharma or Adharma. Subhuti (Buddha's disciple), 'what do you think? Has the Tathagata (Buddha) attained Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi (unsurpassed perfect enlightenment)? Has the Tathagata' spoken any Dharma?' Commentary: According to Vasubandhu's (a Buddhist philosopher) view, this is to dispel the third doubt. Some doubt that the above says there is no thought. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
因还得无相果。何故释迦佛于道场成觉。说法度人双林入灭等耶。真谛引经偈言。七年作婴儿八年作童子。四年学五明十年受欲乐。二十九出家三十五成道。四十五年中广度诸众生。此等即是有相之果。岂彼不行无相因耶。为破此疑故有此文也。于中初佛问次善现答。此初也。然佛有三种。一者法身谓离妄之真理。二者报身会真之妙智。三者化身应物之权迹。谓法身妙理菩萨所不测。报身实智二乘所不知故。应物现形随方化接。有睹斯质便谓实证菩提真能说法。便是有想。今破此疑故约真如法身以问善现也。 须菩提“言如我解佛所说义无有定法名阿耨多罗三藐三菩提亦无有定法”如来可说。 述曰。第二答中有二。初答次释此初也。善现意云。若据世谛报化二身可有得菩提。可有说法。若约第一义谛者真如法身内自堪寂。本无得菩提。亦无能说法。无有定法者谓法身无相中无有定法得菩提。亦无定法而可说也。但欲无定可得可说。不遮世谛报化之身亦有不定得不定说也。 何以故“如来所说法皆不可取不可说非法”非非法。 述曰。此释也。于中两重展转释前。此初也。谓何以故无定法可说。内既不可说于外亦不可取。故于外若有可取是应于内亦有可说。既无可取明无可说也。不可说非法 非非法者。谓愚夫执人法为有名之为法。拨圆成是无名非法。圣者达人法为无名为非法。了圆成为有名非非法。法身寂净不可说非法。亦不可说非非法也。故论云应化非真佛。亦非说法者。说法不二取无说离言相。应化既非真佛真说。即明亦是假佛假说也。于内既无二说于圣者亦不二取。谓取法及非法也。真理离言无其说相故。何故释中但言说不言证。论云若不证者即不能说。故谓要先证方能说也。 所以者“何一切贤圣皆以无为法”而有差别。 述曰。此又释前也。谓诸圣者皆以无分别智契证真理。方能断惑而立差别故圣人说彼无为法。彼圣人所证法既不如是说。何况如是取。何以故。彼法远离言说相非可说故。上来世亲释竟。无著意者此段经文即是第四欲得法身。于中上来明得言说法身竟。此第二明欲得证得法身。于中有二。谓一者智相至得法身住处。谓无分别智能契得真如法身。即以智相为住处也。二者福相至得法身住处。此明初也。谓前欲得色身佛言色身虚妄。教求法身。欲求法身先修诸真之智。即是菩提法身故名智相。由求智相法身故佛以真如法身。为问谓外事中而有执他可得菩提。随众生机有可说法。于内无相法身之中本无智身菩提可得。亦无法而可说故以为问也。善现答言义亦同。然解佛 现代汉语译本 ‘非非法者’，指的是愚昧之人执着于人法，认为‘有名’的才是法，否定圆成实性是‘无名非法’。而圣者通达人法是‘无名’，所以是‘非法’，了悟圆成实性是‘有名’，所以是‘非非法’。法身寂静清净，不可说是‘非法’，也不可说是‘非非法’。所以《摄大乘论》说：‘应化身不是真佛，也不是说法者。’说法要不二取，达到无说离言的境界。应化身既然不是真佛真说，那就说明也是假佛假说。内心既然没有二种说法，对于圣者来说，也不会有二种执取，也就是执取法和非法。真理远离言语，没有可以言说的相状。为什么解释中只说‘说’而不说‘证’呢？《摄大乘论》说：‘如果不能证得，就不能说。’所以说一定要先证得才能说。 ‘所以者何？一切贤圣皆以无为法’而有差别。 解释说：这又是对前面的解释。意思是说，各位圣者都是用无分别智来契合证悟真理，才能断除迷惑而建立差别。所以圣人所说的无为法，圣人所证悟的法，既然不是像这样说的，又怎么能像这样执取呢？为什么呢？因为这种法远离言语相，是不可说的。以上是世亲的解释完毕。无著的用意是，这段经文就是第四个‘欲得法身’。其中，上面说明了得到言说法身。这里第二部分说明想要证得法身，其中有两点：一是智相至得法身住处，意思是说，无分别智能契合得到真如法身，就以智相作为住处。二是福相至得法身住处。这里说明第一点。意思是说，前面想要得到色身，佛说色身是虚妄的，教导去寻求法身。想要寻求法身，首先要修习各种真实的智慧，这就是菩提法身，所以叫做智相。因为寻求智相法身，所以佛以真如法身来提问，意思是说，在外在的事物中，有人执着于他法，认为可以得到菩提，随着众生的根器，有可以说法。在内在的无相法身之中，本来就没有智身菩提可以得到，也没有法可以言说，所以才这样提问。善现回答说，道理也是一样的。然后解释佛