English
English version Answer: If there are views such as cause and effect, it means there is 'something obtained' (something clung to). 'Something obtained' is called coarse, not subtle; 'something obtained' is called non-Dharma, not Dharma; 'something obtained' is impure attachment, not a lotus flower. Now, ceasing views such as cause and effect means 'nothing obtained' (no clinging). Because of 'nothing obtained', it is called the Wonderful Dharma, called a lotus flower, therefore this is the principle of this Sutra. Question: How do we know that ceasing the view of 'something obtained' is the Wonderful Dharma Lotus Flower? Answer: Now, I will briefly cite three proofs: First, the *Madhyamaka-karika (Treatise on the Middle Way)* says, 'When investigating all dharmas from the chapter on conditions, existence is empty, non-existence is empty, both existence and non-existence are empty, neither existence nor non-existence is empty. This is called Suchness, Dharma-nature, Reality, Nirvana.' Therefore, we know that seeking cause and effect with 'something obtained' and finding it unattainable is the Wonderful Dharma. Second, the *Lotus Sutra Treatise* explains the 'Expedient Means' chapter, saying, 'I use countless expedient means to guide sentient beings to leave all attachments. There are four kinds of attachments: first, attachment to realms (such as the Three Realms); second, attachment to grounds (such as the Desire Realm ground up to the Cessation of Perception and Sensation ground); third, differentiated attachments (laypeople attached to the five desires, renunciates attached to fame and gain); fourth, vehicle attachments (attached to the Small Vehicle, attached to the Great Vehicle, etc.).' Therefore, we know that 'something attached' is not called the Wonderful Dharma; 'nothing attached' is the principle of this Sutra. Third, Guan Zhong Zhao's *Bai Lun (One Hundred Treatises) Preface* says, 'Serene and without reliance, the principle naturally manifests; tranquil and without basis, the matter does not lose its truth. The way of transforming the root lies here.' Therefore, we know that a mind without reliance or attachment is the Wonderful Dharma, and is the principle of this Sutra. Second, to adopt without refuting, it is necessary to first break down and cleanse the attachment to 'something obtained', the mind of permanence and annihilation, completely without residue. Only then can one discern the Buddha's expedient use of conditions and provisional names. If sentient beings should hear the cause as the principle and attain enlightenment, then speak of the cause for them; if they should hear the effect as the principle and attain enlightenment, then speak of the effect for them; if they should hear both cause and effect as the principle and attain enlightenment, then speak of both cause and effect for them. The Buddhas and Bodhisattvas of the three times speak Sutras and compose treatises with the intention of enabling sentient beings to attain enlightenment as the true principle, and the teachings are not fixed. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 问： 何以知然耶？ 答：
Chinese
凡引六证：一者、《文殊问经》云“十八部论及本二皆从大乘出，无是亦无非，我说未来起”。二者、《大集经》云“虽有五部不同，皆不妨如来法界及大涅槃”。三者、《摄大乘论》云“诸佛唯以利益为定而教无有定”。四者、《智度论》明，六家释波若，论主不判其是非，以皆出佛口并能开道常益物故，无非正经。五者、《中论．观法品》云“诸法无决定相，诸佛有无量方便，或说一切实、或说一切不实、亦实亦非实、非实非非实，四句并皆得道，皆是佛法”。六者、求那跋摩三藏遗文偈云“诸论各异端，修行理无二，偏执有是非，达者无违诤”，故知适缘所宜教无定也。 第三、亦立亦破者，因果等三虽出经文，非是正意，故须破之。所言立者，今一往对上三师所明，此经以非因非果中道为体，因果等为经大用。 问： 因果等为用、非因果为体，此出何文？ 答： 〈方便品〉中明如是大果报种种性相义，此偈颂上因果之法；次偈即云“是法不可示，言辞相寂灭”，此偈即明非因果义。故知以非因果为体、因果等为用。因果、非因果既尔，三一、近远、权实亦然：非三非一为体，三一为用；非近非远为体，近远为用；非权非实 问： 凭什么知道是这样呢？ 答： 总共引用六个证据：第一，《文殊问经》说：‘十八部论及其根本，二者都从大乘而出，没有是也没有非，我说未来会兴起。’第二，《大集经》说：‘虽然有五部不同，都不妨碍如来的法界和大涅槃。’第三，《摄大乘论》说：‘诸佛唯以利益众生为目的，而教法没有固定不变的。’第四，《智度论》阐明，六家解释般若，论主不判断他们的对错，因为都出自佛口，并且都能开启道业，常常利益众生，所以没有不是正经的。第五，《中论·观法品》说：‘诸法没有决定的相状，诸佛有无量的方便，或者说一切是真实的，或者说一切是不真实的，或者说既是真实又是不真实的，或者说既不是真实也不是非真实的，四句都能得道，都是佛法。’第六，求那跋摩（Gunabhadra）三藏遗文偈说：‘各种论典各有不同的观点，修行之理却没有两种，偏执己见就会有是非，通达的人就没有违背争论。’所以知道适应机缘，教法没有固定不变的。 第三，亦立亦破是指，因果等三法虽然出自经文，但不是佛法的真正用意，所以需要破除它。所说的‘立’是指，现在暂且针对上面三位法师所阐明的，这部经以非因非果的中道为本体，因果等法为经的大用。 问： 以因果等法为用，以非因果为体，这出自哪部经文？ 答： 《方便品》中阐明如是大果报种种性相的意义，这首偈颂赞叹上面的因果之法；下一首偈颂就说：‘这个法不可示现，言辞相寂灭’，这首偈颂就阐明非因果的意义。所以知道以非因果为本体，因果等法为作用。因果、非因果既然如此，三一、近远、权实也是这样：非三非一为本体，三一为作用；非近非远为本体，近远为作用；非权非实为
English
Question: How can this be known? Answer: There are six proofs in total: First, the *Manjushri Questioning Sutra* says, 'The eighteen schools of treatises and their roots both come from the Mahayana, there is neither right nor wrong, I say they will arise in the future.' Second, the *Mahasamghata Sutra* says, 'Although there are five different schools, they do not hinder the Tathagata's (Thus Come One) Dharma Realm and Great Nirvana.' Third, the *Treatise on the Summary of the Great Vehicle* says, 'All Buddhas only aim to benefit beings, and the teachings are not fixed.' Fourth, the *Mahaprajnaparamita Shastra* clarifies that the six schools interpret Prajna (wisdom), and the author does not judge their right or wrong, because they all come from the Buddha's mouth and can open the path, constantly benefiting beings, so none are not proper scriptures. Fifth, the *Madhyamakakarika, Chapter on Observation of Dharmas* says, 'All dharmas (phenomena) have no fixed characteristics, Buddhas have limitless expedient means, sometimes saying everything is real, sometimes saying everything is unreal, sometimes saying both real and unreal, sometimes saying neither real nor unreal, all four statements can attain the path, all are Buddha-dharma.' Sixth, the verse from the posthumous writings of the Tripitaka Master Gunabhadra (求那跋摩) says, 'Various treatises have different viewpoints, but the principle of practice is not twofold, clinging to one's own views leads to right and wrong, those who understand have no disagreements.' Therefore, it is known that teachings are not fixed, adapting to the appropriate circumstances. Third, 'establishing and refuting' refers to the fact that although the three dharmas such as cause and effect come from the scriptures, they are not the true intention of the Buddha-dharma, so they need to be refuted. The 'establishing' refers to, for now, in response to what the above three masters have clarified, this sutra takes the Middle Way of neither cause nor effect as its essence, and the dharmas such as cause and effect as the great function of the sutra. Question: Taking cause and effect as the function, and non-cause and non-effect as the essence, which scripture does this come from? Answer: The *Expedient Means Chapter* clarifies the meaning of such great karmic retribution with various characteristics, this verse praises the above Dharma of cause and effect; the next verse says, 'This Dharma cannot be shown, the aspect of words is extinguished', this verse clarifies the meaning of non-cause and non-effect. Therefore, it is known that non-cause and non-effect is taken as the essence, and cause and effect as the function. Since cause and effect, and non-cause and non-effect are like this, so are three and one, near and far, expedient and real: non-three and non-one is the essence, three and one is the function; non-near and non-far is the essence, near and far is the function; non-expedient and non-real is --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
为体，权实为用。然他义但得经用不识经体，既不得体云何得用？设使得用用义不成。若执因是乘者即斥于果，执果是乘者便破于因，各执因果即弹双用因果。而此经始终具四句明乘义：一者、因乘非果乘，即诸子乘此宝车直至道场；二者、果乘非因乘，故云“佛自住大乘，如其所得法，定慧力庄严，以此度众生”；三者、双用因果为乘，即含前二句；四者非因非果为乘，谓“是法不可示，言辞相寂灭”。 问： 乘是运出义，非因非果云何是乘耶？ 答： 说非因果令众生出四句越百非，故名真运出义也。又经云“佛性有五种名”，五种名中名为一乘。而经既明佛性是非因果，一乘岂不得是非因果耶？虽有三句四句为乘用，第四句为乘体，故说上三句归于非因非果，第四句亦由非因非果故有因果等用也。 问： 古旧谁用非因非果为经体耶？ 答： 《注法花经》采江左安、林、一、远，河右什、肇、融、恒，八师要说著于经序，故云“出宅求车何小何大，灭城采宝孰近孰远，教凝于三一之表，果玄乎丈六之外”也。 第四、非破非立者，然实未曾有三家义之可破，亦未曾有今义之可立。若有破有立即是可以言宣，何谓“诸法寂灭相不可以言宣”耶？肇公 现代汉语译本 以‘体’来说，权巧和真实是它的作用。然而其他的解释只懂得经文的作用却不认识经文的本体，既然不了解本体，又怎么能了解作用呢？即使了解了作用，作用的意义也不完整。如果执着于‘因’是‘乘’，那就是否定了‘果’；如果执着于‘果’是‘乘’，那就是否定了‘因’；各自执着于‘因’或‘果’，那就是同时否定了‘因’和‘果’的作用。而这部经从始至终都具备四句来阐明‘乘’的意义：第一，‘因乘’而非‘果乘’，即众弟子乘坐这宝车直至道场；第二，‘果乘’而非‘因乘’，所以说‘佛自住大乘，如其所得法，定慧力庄严，以此度众生’；第三，同时运用‘因’和‘果’作为‘乘’，即包含前两句；第四，非‘因’非‘果’作为‘乘’，即说‘是法不可示，言辞相寂灭’。 问： ‘乘’是运载出去的意思，非‘因’非‘果’怎么能是‘乘’呢？ 答： 说非‘因’非‘果’是为了让众生超出四句，超越百种错误的知见，所以才叫做真正的运载出去的意义。而且经中说‘佛性有五种名称’，五种名称中有一种名称叫做‘一乘’。既然经文已经阐明佛性是非‘因’非‘果’，那么‘一乘’怎么可能不是非‘因’非‘果’呢？虽然有三句四句作为‘乘’的作用，但第四句才是‘乘’的本体，所以说前面三句都归于非‘因’非‘果’，第四句也因为非‘因’非‘果’才会有‘因’‘果’等作用。 问： 古代有哪些人用非‘因’非‘果’作为经文的本体呢？ 答： 《注法华经》采纳了江左的安法师、林法师、一法师、远法师，河右的鸠摩罗什（Kumārajīva）、僧肇（Sengzhao）、道融（Daorong）、僧恒（Sengheng）这八位大师的重要论述，写在经序中，所以说‘出宅求车，何必计较车的小大；灭城采宝，何必计较路的远近；教义凝聚在三一之表，果报玄妙于丈六金身之外’。 第四，非破非立：实际上并没有三家的义理可以被破斥，也没有现在的义理可以被建立。如果有破有立，那就是可以用言语表达的，又怎么能说‘诸法寂灭相不可以言宣’呢？僧肇大师（Sengzhao）