Chinese
相众生相寿者相。无法相亦无非法相 初徴信者。以何义故。得如来悉知悉见。后释二。一无我执。执取自体为我。计我展转趣于余趣为人。计我盛衰苦乐种种变异相续为众生。计我一报命根不断而住为寿者。二无法执。论云。无法相者。能取所取一切法无。亦无非法相者。无我真空实有。然离二执正是得佛知见。成就净信之本善根福德。却是相兼故。论云。有智慧便足。何故。复说持戒功德。为示现实相差别义故。亦有持戒功德。依信心恭敬能生实相故。不但说般若二因。显未除细执。 何以故。是诸众生。若心取相则为着我人众生寿者。若取法相即着我人众生寿者。何以故。若取非法相即着我人众生寿者 若心取下。总明二相总解取法非法。尽名相也。亦是建立取相。则我等相便生立义宗也。若取法下。别明二相。论云。但有无明使无现行粗烦恼。示无我见故。无著云。但取法及非法相转。非我等想。以我等想及依止不转。中有徴者。取法但为法相。何故便着我等。释云。取非法亦着我等。何况取法以后释前也。四示中道之玄门。 是故。不应取法不应取非法。以是义故。如来常说汝等比丘。知我说法如筏喻者。法尚应舍何况非法 初正结归中后引说。以证筏喻者。假言显义。不应如言执义。不执即 现代汉语译本：相、众生相、寿者相，无法相也无非法相。最初提问信仰者，以什么意义，能够让如来完全知晓完全看见？后面解释分为两部分。第一，去除我执。执着于自身为‘我’（Atman），认为‘我’（Atman）不断地在各个轮回中流转；认为‘我’（Atman）经历盛衰、苦乐种种变异，相续不断，是为‘众生’（Sattva）；认为‘我’（Atman）一期的寿命，命根不断而存活，是为‘寿者’（Jiva）。第二，去除法执。论中说：‘无法相’（Asat-dharma-samjna）指的是，能取和所取的一切法都不存在；‘亦无非法相’（Naivasat-dharma-samjna）指的是，无我的真空实实在在存在。然而，离开这两种执着，才能真正获得佛的知见，成就净信的根本善根福德。这两种执着是相互关联的，所以论中说：‘有智慧就足够了，为什么还要说持戒的功德？’这是为了显示现实相的差别意义。也有持戒的功德，依靠信心和恭敬能够产生实相，所以不仅仅是说般若智慧这两种原因，是为了显示还没有去除细微的执着。 为什么呢？因为这些众生，如果心中执取于相，就会执着于我（Atman）、人（Pudgala）、众生（Sattva）、寿者（Jiva）。如果执取于法相（Dharma-samjna），就会执着于我（Atman）、人（Pudgala）、众生（Sattva）、寿者（Jiva）。为什么呢？如果执取于非法相（Adharma-samjna），就会执着于我（Atman）、人（Pudgala）、众生（Sattva）、寿者（Jiva）。’如果心中执取于相’以下，总的说明了两种相，总的解释了执取法和非法，都叫做‘相’。这也是建立执取相，那么我等之相便会产生，建立义理宗派。‘如果执取于法’以下，分别说明两种相。论中说：‘只有无明（Avidya）的驱使，没有现行的粗大烦恼，显示了没有我见（Atma-drishti）的缘故。’无著（Asanga）说：‘只是执取法相和非法相的转变，而不是我等之想，因为我等之想以及所依止的不会转变。’其中有疑问，执取法只是为了法相，为什么就会执着于我等呢？解释说：‘执取非法也会执着于我等，更何况是执取法呢？’这是用后面的解释前面的。第四，显示中道的玄妙之门。 因此，不应该执取法，也不应该执取非法。因为这个缘故，如来（Tathagata）常常说：‘你们这些比丘（Bhikkhu），知道我说法如同木筏的比喻吗？’法尚且应该舍弃，何况非法呢？’最初是正确的总结归纳，后面引用说法来证明。‘木筏的比喻’，是用假借的言语来显示义理，不应该像执着言语一样执着义理，不执着就是...
English
English version: The characteristic of a phenomenon, the characteristic of a being, the characteristic of a life, neither the characteristic of a dharma nor the characteristic of a non-dharma. Initially questioning the faithful, by what meaning can the Tathagata (如来) fully know and fully see? The subsequent explanation is divided into two parts. First, the removal of attachment to self. Clinging to oneself as 'I' (Atman), believing that 'I' (Atman) continuously transmigrates through various realms; believing that 'I' (Atman) experiences prosperity and decline, suffering and joy, continuously changing, is called 'being' (Sattva); believing that 'I' (Atman) has a lifespan in one existence, with the life force continuously existing, is called 'life' (Jiva). Second, the removal of attachment to dharma. The treatise states: 'The characteristic of non-dharma' (Asat-dharma-samjna) refers to the non-existence of all dharmas that can be grasped and what is grasped; 'neither the characteristic of non-dharma' (Naivasat-dharma-samjna) refers to the real existence of the emptiness of selflessness. However, only by abandoning these two attachments can one truly attain the knowledge and vision of the Buddha, and achieve the fundamental roots of goodness and merit of pure faith. These two attachments are interconnected, so the treatise states: 'Having wisdom is sufficient, why is the merit of upholding precepts also mentioned?' This is to show the different meanings of the reality of phenomena. There is also the merit of upholding precepts, which can generate the true reality through faith and reverence, so it is not just about the two causes of prajna wisdom, but to show that subtle attachments have not yet been removed. Why is this? Because if these beings cling to characteristics in their minds, they will be attached to self (Atman), person (Pudgala), being (Sattva), and life (Jiva). If they cling to the characteristic of dharma (Dharma-samjna), they will be attached to self (Atman), person (Pudgala), being (Sattva), and life (Jiva). Why is this? If they cling to the characteristic of non-dharma (Adharma-samjna), they will be attached to self (Atman), person (Pudgala), being (Sattva), and life (Jiva).' 'If they cling to characteristics in their minds' below, generally explains the two characteristics, and generally explains clinging to dharma and non-dharma, all are called 'characteristics'. This is also establishing the clinging to characteristics, then the characteristics of self and others will arise, establishing doctrinal schools. 'If they cling to dharma' below, separately explains the two characteristics. The treatise states: 'Only driven by ignorance (Avidya), without the manifest gross afflictions, showing the reason for the absence of self-view (Atma-drishti).' Asanga (无著) says: 'It is only the transformation of clinging to the characteristic of dharma and the characteristic of non-dharma, not the thought of self and others, because the thought of self and others and what it relies on will not transform.' Among them, there is a question, clinging to dharma is only for the characteristic of dharma, why would it be attached to self and others? The explanation says: 'Clinging to non-dharma will also be attached to self and others, let alone clinging to dharma?' This is using the later to explain the former. Fourth, revealing the profound gate of the Middle Way. Therefore, one should not cling to dharma, nor should one cling to non-dharma. For this reason, the Tathagata (如来) often says: 'You monks (Bhikkhu), do you know that my teaching is like the parable of the raft?' Even dharma should be abandoned, let alone non-dharma?' Initially, it is a correct summary and conclusion, and later it cites teachings to prove it. 'The parable of the raft' is using metaphorical language to reveal the meaning, one should not cling to the meaning like clinging to the words, not clinging is... --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
为不取。非全弃也。偈云。彼不住随顺于法中证智。论释云。不住者得证智。舍教如到彼岸。随顺者。随顺彼证智之教法。如未到岸。无著云。法尚应舍者。实相生故。何况非法者。理不应故。三断无相。云何得说疑。论云。向说不可以相见佛。佛非有为。云何释迦得阿耨菩提。云何说法。断之文二。初问答断疑四。初举疑因以问。 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 佛问得不。意显不得故。无著云。显示翻于正觉取故。二顺实理以酬。 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 偈云。应化非真佛。亦非说法者。三释无定法之言。 何以故。如来所说法。皆不可取不可说。非法非非法 无著云。不可取者。谓正闻时。不可说者。谓正说时。非法者。分别性故。非非法者。法无我理故。论云。彼法非法非非法。依真如义说。非法者。一切法无体相故。非非法者。彼真如无我实相有故。何故。唯言说不言证。有言。说者。即成证义故。若不证者。则不能说。四释无取说之所以。 所以者何。一切贤圣皆以无为法而有差别 魏云。一切圣人皆以无为法得名。论意云。圣人但依真如清净得名。非别得法故无取说。而有差 现代汉语译本： ‘为不取’，并非完全抛弃。偈语说：‘他们不住留恋，在随顺于法的过程中证得智慧。’ 论释说：‘不住留恋是指获得证智，舍弃教法就像到达彼岸。随顺是指随顺那证智的教法，就像尚未到达岸边。’ 无著菩萨说：‘法尚且应该舍弃，因为实相由此而生；何况不是法呢，从道理上讲更不应该执着。’ 三断除对无相的疑惑，如何才能说断除了疑惑呢？ 论中说：‘之前说过不可以相见佛，佛不是有为法。’ 如何解释释迦牟尼佛证得阿耨多罗三藐三菩提（Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi，无上正等正觉），如何说法呢？ 断除疑惑的文分为两部分。首先是问答断除疑惑，分为四个部分。首先提出疑问的原因来发问。 须菩提（Subhuti，佛陀的弟子）啊，你的意思如何？如来（Tathagata，佛陀的称号）证得了阿耨多罗三藐三菩提吗？如来有所说法吗？ 佛陀问是否证得，意在显示不得。无著菩萨说：‘显示了颠倒取证觉悟。’ 第二，顺应真实的道理来回答。 须菩提说：‘如我理解佛所说的意义，没有固定的法可以称为阿耨多罗三藐三菩提，也没有固定的法是如来可以说的。’ 偈语说：‘应化身不是真佛，也不是说法者。’ 第三，解释没有固定法的说法。 为什么呢？如来所说的法，都是不可执取、不可言说的，不是法，也不是非非法。 无著菩萨说：‘不可执取，是指在正确听闻时；不可说，是指在正确说法时；非法，是因为是分别性的缘故；非非法，是因为法无我之理的缘故。’ 论中说：‘那法既不是法，也不是非非法，是依据真如的意义来说的。非法，是因为一切法没有自体和相状的缘故；非非法，是因为那真如无我的实相是存在的缘故。’ 为什么只说言说而不说证悟呢？ 有人说，说，就是成就证悟的意义。如果不证悟，就不能说。 第四，解释没有执取和说的原因。 所以是什么原因呢？一切贤圣都是以无为法而有差别。’ 魏译本说：‘一切圣人都是以无为法得名的。’ 论中的意思是说：圣人只是依据真如清净而得名，并非另外得到什么法，所以没有执取和说，而有差别。
English
English version: 'To not take' does not mean to completely abandon. A verse says: 'They do not dwell, and in accordance with the Dharma, they attain wisdom.' The commentary explains: 'Not dwelling means attaining wisdom, abandoning teachings is like reaching the other shore. In accordance means following the teachings of that wisdom, like not yet reaching the shore.' Asanga (无著, a Buddhist philosopher) says: 'Even the Dharma should be abandoned, because the true nature arises from it; how much more so what is not Dharma, which should not be clung to in principle.' The three cut off doubts about no-form, how can it be said that doubts are cut off? The treatise says: 'It was said before that the Buddha cannot be seen with form, the Buddha is not conditioned.' How to explain that Shakyamuni (释迦牟尼, the historical Buddha) attained Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi (阿耨多罗三藐三菩提, unsurpassed perfect enlightenment), and how to teach the Dharma? The text on cutting off doubts is divided into two parts. First, the question and answer cut off doubts, divided into four parts. First, raise the reason for doubt to ask. Subhuti (须菩提, a disciple of the Buddha), what do you think? Did the Tathagata (如来, title of the Buddha) attain Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi? Does the Tathagata have anything to teach? The Buddha asks whether it was attained, implying that it was not. Asanga says: 'It shows the reversal of taking enlightenment for attainment.' Second, respond in accordance with the true principle. Subhuti said: 'As I understand the meaning of what the Buddha said, there is no fixed Dharma that can be called Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi, nor is there any fixed Dharma that the Tathagata can speak of.' A verse says: 'The manifested body is not the true Buddha, nor is it the one who teaches the Dharma.' Third, explain the statement of no fixed Dharma. Why is that? All the Dharma spoken by the Tathagata is ungraspable and unspeakable, neither Dharma nor non-Dharma. Asanga says: 'Ungraspable means at the time of correct hearing; unspeakable means at the time of correct speaking; non-Dharma, because it is of a discriminating nature; non-non-Dharma, because of the principle of Dharma without self.' The treatise says: 'That Dharma is neither Dharma nor non-Dharma, it is spoken according to the meaning of Suchness. Non-Dharma, because all Dharmas have no self-nature and form; non-non-Dharma, because that true nature of no-self is real.' Why only speak of speaking and not of realization? Some say that speaking is the meaning of accomplishing realization. If one does not realize, one cannot speak. Fourth, explain the reason for no grasping and speaking. What is the reason? All the wise and holy ones are differentiated by unconditioned Dharma.' The Wei translation says: 'All the sages are named by unconditioned Dharma.' The meaning in the treatise is: Sages are named only according to the purity of Suchness, not by obtaining any other Dharma, so there is no grasping and speaking, but there are differences. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------