English
English version: ‘Very much,’ World-Honored One (Bhagavan, usually referring to the Buddha)! ‘Why is it that if these aggregates of subtle particles truly existed, the Buddha would not speak of them as aggregates of subtle particles? The reason is that when the Buddha speaks of aggregates of subtle particles, they are not aggregates of subtle particles; it is merely called’ aggregates of subtle particles. Commentary: This is the second point. Vasubandhu (an Indian Buddhist philosopher) says: It is merely using subtle particles as a metaphor; it is not that they truly exist as they are spoken of, as held by the Vaisheshika (an ancient Indian philosophical school) and others. When the Buddha speaks of aggregates of subtle particles, it means using subtle particles as a metaphor for the manifested body. ‘They are not subtle particles’ means that they are not the real subtle particles as held by externalists. Asanga (one of the founders of the Yogacara school of Indian Buddhism) says: It is only to break the attachment to oneness that, through contemplation and analysis to the point of indivisibility, subtle particles are nominally posited; they do not truly exist. World-Honored One (Bhagavan)! The Tathagata (one of the titles of the Buddha) said, ‘The three thousand great thousand worlds are not worlds;’ it is called a world. Commentary: This second point uses the world as a metaphor for the Dharma body. Within this, there are two parts: first, the statement, then the explanation. This is the first part. When the Tathagata speaks of the world, it means using the world as a metaphor. ‘They are not worlds’ means that they are not the real worlds formed by numerous real ultimate particles as held by externalists. They hold that two ultimate particles give rise to a third, and so on. Asanga (Asanga) says: This breaks the expedient of nominal aggregates. ‘World’ refers to the world of sentient beings. They are named only by nominal aggregates. Why is it that ‘if the world truly existed, then’ it would be a single aggregate? Commentary: In this second explanation, first, there is a refutation; second, a negation; and third, a clarification of attachment to reality. This is the first part. It means that if the world existed as they hold, then it would not be an attachment; it would be right view and therefore not false. Because there is no real attachment to reality, it is a single aggregate. ‘Single aggregate’ refers to the attachment to self, which is the clinging to the five aggregates as a single body, considering them as ‘I’; therefore, it is called a single aggregate. The Tathagata said that a single aggregate ‘is not a single aggregate; it is’ called a single aggregate. Commentary: This second part is the negation. It means that the Buddha only nominally posits a single aggregate on the basis of the false aggregates arising from the combination of causes and conditions; it is not the single aggregate as they hold. ‘It is not a single aggregate’ means that it is not the single aggregate that is clung to. Since the nominal positing of a single aggregate is not, it clarifies the world. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 亦非有实也。
Chinese
一合相者“则是不可说但凡夫之人”贪着其事。 述曰。此第三明执实也。谓如来假说一合相。凡夫于中起执为实也。 须菩提“若人言佛说我见人见众生见寿者见须菩提于意云何是人解我”所说义不。 述曰。世亲云第三明法我无实。于中有二。初明无我。次发阿耨多罗下明无法。前中初佛叙其外疑问其解不。次善现悬解答明不闲。此初也。谓小乘人等说言必有体。心不缘无。言有体故佛说我见等。明有我实心不缘无故。所执之义必成其有令能彼言故云若有人言也。无著云。此下第二明入相应三昧不分别。于中初明如所不分别为入之方便。次发菩提心下明何人何法不分别。前中初问次答。此初也。 不也世尊是人不解“如来所说义何以故世尊说我见人见众生见寿者见即非我见人见众生见寿者见是名我见人见众生见”寿者见。 述曰。此第二答也。谓于诸法本无我法。众生妄情执为实有。佛为破彼执故。随其情说其解而说为我法。非谓言诠即有实体。纵令心取何废无真。大乘之义缘无得生心。言诠不称实故。谓世尊随情逐解假说我人。非如其执即实有体。故云即非我见人见等也。是名我见等者谓如来假说也。 须菩提“发阿耨多罗三藐三菩提心者于一切法 现代汉语译本： 亦非真实存在。 所谓‘一合相’，是指‘不可说，但凡夫俗子’贪恋执着的事物。 注释说：这是第三个方面，阐明执着于实有的错误。意思是如来只是假说‘一合相’，凡夫却在其中产生执着，认为它是真实存在的。 须菩提，‘如果有人说佛说有我见、人见、众生见、寿者见，须菩提，你认为这个人理解我’所说的含义吗？ 注释说：世亲菩萨说，第三个方面是阐明法我和我都没有实体。其中分为两部分。首先阐明无我，然后从‘发阿耨多罗’开始阐明无法。前面一部分，首先是佛叙述外道的疑问，然后询问须菩提是否理解。接下来是善现回答，说明不理解。这是第一部分。意思是小乘人等说，任何事物必定有本体，心不能缘于空无。因为有本体，所以佛说我见等，表明有我的实体，心不缘于空无，所以他们所执着的含义必定是真实存在的，从而能够支持他们的言论，所以说‘如果有人说’。无著菩萨说，下面第二部分是阐明进入相应三昧而不分别。其中首先阐明不如实分别，作为进入三昧的方便。然后从‘发菩提心’开始阐明什么人什么法不分别。前面一部分，首先是提问，然后是回答。这是第一部分。 ‘不，世尊，这个人不理解’如来所说的含义。‘为什么呢？世尊所说的我见、人见、众生见、寿者见，即非我见、人见、众生见、寿者见，是名我见、人见、众生见’、寿者见。 注释说：这是第二部分的回答。意思是对于诸法，本来没有我法，众生由于虚妄的情感而执着为真实存在。佛为了破除他们的执着，顺应他们的情感和理解而说我法，并非说言语本身就具有实体。即使心中有所取，也不会妨碍没有真实。大乘的含义是缘于空无而产生心，言语不能完全表达真实。意思是世尊顺应众生的情感和理解而假说我人，并非像他们所执着的那样，就是真实存在的本体。所以说‘即非我见、人见’等。‘是名我见’等，是指如来假说。 须菩提，‘发起阿耨多罗三藐三菩提心（无上正等正觉之心）的人，对于一切法’
English
English version: Nor is it truly existent. The 'one aggregate' refers to things that are 'unspeakable, but ordinary people' are attached to and crave. Commentary states: This is the third aspect, clarifying the error of clinging to reality. It means that the Tathagata (如来) [Thus Come One] provisionally speaks of the 'one aggregate,' but ordinary people develop attachment to it, believing it to be truly existent. 'Subhuti (须菩提) [one of the principal disciples of the Buddha], if someone says that the Buddha speaks of self-view, person-view, sentient being-view, and lifespan-view, Subhuti, what do you think? Does this person understand the meaning of my' teaching?' Commentary states: Vasubandhu (世亲) [an influential Buddhist scholar] says that the third aspect clarifies that neither the Dharma-self nor the self has substance. It is divided into two parts. First, it clarifies no-self, and then, beginning with 'arising Anuttara (阿耨多罗),' it clarifies no-Dharma. In the first part, first, the Buddha narrates the heretics' questions and then asks Subhuti whether he understands. Next, Subhuti answers, explaining that he does not understand. This is the first part. It means that the Hinayana (小乘) [smaller vehicle] people, etc., say that everything must have a substance, and the mind cannot be based on emptiness. Because there is substance, the Buddha speaks of self-view, etc., indicating that there is a real self, and the mind is not based on emptiness, so the meaning they cling to must be truly existent, thereby supporting their statements, so it says 'if someone says.' Asanga (无著) [a major exponent of the Yogacara school of Buddhism] says that the second part below clarifies entering the corresponding Samadhi (三昧) [a state of meditative consciousness] without discrimination. Among them, first, it clarifies not truly discriminating as a means of entering Samadhi. Then, beginning with 'arising Bodhicitta (菩提心) [the mind of enlightenment],' it clarifies what people and what Dharmas are not discriminated. In the first part, first, there is a question, and then there is an answer. This is the first part. 'No, World Honored One (世尊), this person does not understand' the meaning of what the Tathagata said. 'Why? The self-view, person-view, sentient being-view, and lifespan-view that the World Honored One speaks of are not self-view, person-view, sentient being-view, and lifespan-view; they are called self-view, person-view, sentient being-view,' and lifespan-view. Commentary states: This is the second part of the answer. It means that for all Dharmas, there is originally no self-Dharma, but sentient beings cling to them as truly existent due to false emotions. In order to break their attachment, the Buddha speaks of self-Dharma in accordance with their emotions and understanding, not saying that language itself has substance. Even if the mind takes something, it does not hinder the absence of truth. The meaning of Mahayana (大乘) [greater vehicle] is that the mind arises from emptiness, and language cannot fully express the truth. It means that the World Honored One provisionally speaks of self and person in accordance with sentient beings' emotions and understanding, not that they are truly existent substances as they cling to. Therefore, it says 'they are not self-view, person-view,' etc. 'They are called self-view,' etc., refers to the Tathagata's provisional speaking. 'Subhuti, those who have aroused the mind of Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi (阿耨多罗三藐三菩提) [unsurpassed, complete and perfect enlightenment], regarding all Dharmas' --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
应如是知如是见如是信解”不生法相。 述曰。此第二明无法也。于中初劝知见次总结之。此初也。谓若发心者证真如时不见所执法相名为正智也。无著云。发菩提心者显示何人是无分别也。于一切法者显示于何法不分别。应如是知见等者。显示增上心增上智故于无分别中知见胜解。于中若智依止奢摩他故知。依止毗钵舍那故见。此二依止三摩提故。胜解以自在故。解内攀缘影像。彼名胜解。谓知与见但是一。无分别智与意相应。今言依止观为别者。据前加行而说也。谓前欲修止故发智名之为知。欲修观故生智名之为见也。 须菩提“所言法相者如来说即非法相”是名法相。 述曰。此总结也。所言法相者者谓假说法相也。即非法相者非是实执之法相也。 须菩提“若有人以满无量阿僧祇世界七宝持用布施若有善男子善女人发菩萨心者持于此经乃至四句偈等受持读诵为人演说”其福胜彼。 述曰。世亲云此为第四子段中第四文也。于中初福校量。次明离相而说。此初也。谓法身不受福德其化身福德无尽也。以化身福德无尽故能为人说。故发心成佛者受持及为人演。其福胜以七宝布施也。 云何为“人演说不取于相”如如不动。 述曰。此明离相而说也。谓化身说法不取于 现代汉语译本：‘应如是知、如是见、如是信解’，不生法相（dharma-lakṣaṇa，法的表相）。 述曰：此第二明无法也。于中初劝知见次总结之。此初也。谓若发心者证真如（tathātā，事物的真实本性）时，不见所执法相名为正智也。无著（Asaṅga，印度佛教哲学家）云：发菩提心（bodhicitta，为了一切众生的利益而追求觉悟的心）者，显示何人是无分别也。于一切法者，显示于何法不分别。应如是知见等者，显示增上心增上智故，于无分别中知见胜解。于中若智依止奢摩他（śamatha，止，平静）故知，依止毗钵舍那（vipaśyanā，观，内观）故见。此二依止三摩提（samādhi，禅定）故，胜解以自在故。解内攀缘影像。彼名胜解。谓知与见但是一。无分别智与意相应。今言依止观为别者，据前加行而说也。谓前欲修止故发智名之为知。欲修观故生智名之为见也。 须菩提（Subhūti，佛陀的弟子）：‘所言法相者，如来说即非法相，’是名法相。 述曰：此总结也。所言法相者者，谓假说法相也。即非法相者，非是实执之法相也。 须菩提（Subhūti，佛陀的弟子）：‘若有人以满无量阿僧祇（asaṃkhya，极大的数字）世界七宝持用布施，若有善男子善女人发菩萨心（bodhicitta，为了一切众生的利益而追求觉悟的心）者，持于此经乃至四句偈等受持读诵为人演说，’其福胜彼。 述曰：世亲（Vasubandhu，印度佛教哲学家）云：此为第四子段中第四文也。于中初福校量。次明离相而说。此初也。谓法身（dharmakāya，佛的法性之身）不受福德，其化身（nirmāṇakāya，佛的化现之身）福德无尽也。以化身福德无尽故，能为人说。故发心成佛者受持及为人演。其福胜以七宝布施也。 云何为‘人演说不取于相’，如如不动。 述曰：此明离相而说也。谓化身说法不取于相。