English
English version: What does the *Madhyamaka-karika* (中论, Treatise on the Middle Way) discuss? The answer is that the master sometimes says that the two meanings are not different. Sometimes he says that using the twelve gates to expound the meaning is strong, while using them to refute the meaning is weak. Therefore, at the beginning, it is said that we will now briefly explain the meaning of *Mahayana* (摩诃衍, Great Vehicle). If it is the *Madhyamaka-karika*, it initially lists the eight negations to refute outsiders. Therefore, the text says that all *dharmas* (诸法, phenomena) are immeasurable, so why only use these eight matters to refute? Thus, it is known that the *Madhyamaka-karika* primarily refutes and secondarily expounds. Seventh, it explains the difference in the use of provisional names (假, *kalpana*) in the Three Treatises. There are four types of provisional names: the first is the provisional name of cause and condition (*hetu-pratyaya-kalpana*, 因缘假), such as the Two Truths (*dve satyani*, 二谛) of emptiness and existence. The second is the provisional name of following conditions (*pratitya-samutpada-kalpana*, 随缘假), such as the *Cloud World Sutra* saying, 'Worldly people say there is a self (Atman, 我), and I also follow the worldly to say there is a self; wise people say there is no self, and I also follow the wise to say there is no self.' Also, as the *Sata-sastra* (百论, One Hundred Verses Treatise) says, the Buddha follows the wishes of sentient beings, so there are lower, middle, and upper levels of giving, precepts, and wisdom. The third is the provisional name of conforming to conditions (*apeksha-kalpana*, 就缘假), such as sentient beings clinging to existence, so we conform to them by seeking existence, but ultimately seeking existence is unattainable; sentient beings clinging to non-existence, so we conform to them by seeking non-existence, but ultimately seeking non-existence is unattainable. This is the provisional name of conforming to conditions. The fourth is the provisional name of opposing conditions (*pratipaksha-kalpana*, 对缘假), such as saying permanence to counteract impermanence, and saying impermanence to counteract permanence. If it is a sutra or treatise, it fully possesses these four types of provisional names. If it is the Three Treatises, there are only two types of provisional names: one is conforming to conditions, and the other is opposing conditions. If the *Madhyamaka-karika* has a strong provisional name of cause and condition, then the provisional name of opposing conditions is weak. *Nagarjuna* (龙树) seeks birth, death, cessation, and permanence from the perspective of outsiders, and the result is that all are unattainable. If the *Sata-sastra* has a strong provisional name of opposing conditions, then the provisional name of conforming to conditions is weak. Externalists cling to one, so they borrow difference to counter it; externalists cling to difference, so they borrow one to counter it. Eighth, it explains the difference between the Three Treatises in having or not having opposing conditions. If it is the *Sata-sastra*, *Aryadeva* (提婆) Bodhisattva widely collected the views of ninety-six types of heretical teachers, so debaters from all directions gathered at the crossroads, each establishing their own sect. The person who initially established the theory of no direction, *Aryadeva*, directly subdued the externalists and distinguished and refuted the heretical teachers. If it is the *Madhyamaka-karika*, *Nagarjuna* Bodhisattva secretly contemplated, wrote treatises, and subtly gathered confused emotions, using this to subdue and refute, so he did not face outsiders directly, which is different from *Aryadeva*. Question: Why is this so? Answer: *Nagarjuna*'s appearance in the world is like the third Buddha. Therefore, it is said that 'The sun of wisdom has declined, and this person shines on the world again.' 'Drowsiness has been long, and this person awakens people.' It is also said that 'Brightness is like the white moon competing for brilliance, and wisdom is like a sage illuminating together.' Therefore, externalists and *Hinayana* (小乘, Lesser Vehicle) practitioners immediately surrender upon hearing his name. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
不敢论义。所以龙树面不破也。但著论破也。提婆不尔。初但隐迹。为婆罗门故。外道诸师不畏弹之。故与此交论也。问提婆面对外道。亦有著论以不。答提婆九十日中。与外道论义。后还闲林。撰当时之言。着此百论也。 第九明三论所破之缘根有利钝不同者。以众生根生不同。今约中百二论。略开三论种不同。有一种根缘。百论始舍罪福终破空有。当此言下即悟无生也。第二有一种众生。即是外道。经闻提婆当时所破之理。屈申未悟。后出家禀受佛经。方始得悟。是中根人也。第三下根人。外道闻百论所破。虽复言理俱屈。而不得悟。后禀佛经。亦不得悟。非但不悟学于佛经。更复须迷执邪。后为中论所破方得悟也。问亦有内道之人虽闻中论所破不悟。闻百论破方始悟不。答亦有此义故。中论深闻不解。百论就情玄略故。便得悟也。 第十明三论师弟不同者。睿公云。天竺有十六大国方八十里。三百五十年。有马鸣菩萨出世。令大乘之化。重启阎浮提。后五百三十年。有龙树菩萨出世。扇无相之道。三启末俗也。八百余年。有婆罗门种名曰提婆。是龙树上足弟子。其人皆与玄师并照德。与皆机净行故。令佛法兴隆邪道隐塞也。问中论既得秤中。百论亦得秤中不。答二论俱得秤中。问若俱得秤中更有何 现代汉语译本： 不敢直接辩论义理，所以龙树（Nāgārjuna，佛教中观派创始人）避免了直接的辩论，而是通过著作来破斥。提婆（Āryadeva，龙树弟子）则不同，起初只是隐藏身份，因为要面对的是婆罗门。外道和他们的老师们并不害怕辩论，所以提婆才与他们交锋辩论。问：提婆面对外道时，也有著作来论述吗？答：提婆在九十天内与外道辩论义理，之后回到闲静的林间，整理当时的言论，写成了这部《百论》。 第九，说明三论所破斥的对象，因根器有利钝而不同。因为众生的根性不同，现在根据《中论》、《百论》、《十二门论》，大致区分三种不同的根器。第一种根器，听闻《百论》，开始舍弃罪福之见，最终破除空有之执，当即领悟无生之理。第二种众生，即是外道，听闻提婆当时所破斥的道理，虽然感到理屈，但未能领悟。后来出家，接受佛经的教导，才开始领悟，这是中等根器的人。第三种是下等根器的人，外道听闻《百论》的破斥，虽然言语上理屈，但仍然不能领悟。后来学习佛经，也不能领悟，非但不能领悟佛经，反而更加迷惑执着于邪见，之后被《中论》所破斥，才能领悟。问：也有内道之人，虽然听闻《中论》的破斥不能领悟，听闻《百论》的破斥才开始领悟的吗？答：也有这种情况。因为《中论》深奥，听闻后难以理解，《百论》就事论理，玄妙而简略，所以容易领悟。 第十，说明三论的师承不同。睿公（鸠摩罗什弟子）说：天竺有十六大国，方圆八十里。在三百五十年时，有马鸣菩萨（Aśvaghoṣa，佛教大德）出世，使大乘教化重新开启于阎浮提（Jambudvīpa，指我们所居住的这个世界）。五百三十年后，有龙树菩萨出世，弘扬无相之道，第三次开启末法时代的教化。八百多年后，有婆罗门种姓的人，名叫提婆，是龙树最杰出的弟子。他们都与玄妙的老师并肩照耀，都具有清净的德行，所以使佛法兴隆，邪道隐没。问：《中论》既然可以作为衡量标准，那么《百论》也可以作为衡量标准吗？答：《中论》和《百论》都可以作为衡量标准。问：如果都可以作为衡量标准，还有什么...
English
English version: I dare not argue directly about the meaning. Therefore, Nāgārjuna (founder of the Madhyamaka school of Buddhism) avoided direct debate, but refuted through treatises. Āryadeva (Nāgārjuna's disciple) was different. At first, he concealed his identity because he was facing Brahmins. The heretics and their teachers were not afraid of debate, so Āryadeva engaged in debate with them. Question: When Āryadeva faced the heretics, did he also write treatises? Answer: Āryadeva debated with the heretics for ninety days, and then returned to a quiet forest, organized his statements at that time, and wrote this *Śataśāstra* (Hundred Treatise). Ninth, explaining that the objects refuted by the three treatises differ due to the sharpness or dullness of the faculties. Because sentient beings have different faculties, now, based on the *Mūlamadhyamakakārikā* (Fundamental Verses on the Middle Way), *Śataśāstra*, and *Dvādaśanikāyaśāstra* (Twelve Gate Treatise), we roughly distinguish three different types of faculties. The first type of faculty, upon hearing the *Śataśāstra*, initially abandons the views of merit and demerit, and ultimately refutes the attachment to emptiness and existence, immediately realizing the principle of non-origination. The second type of sentient beings, namely heretics, although feeling refuted by the principles refuted by Āryadeva at that time, failed to realize it. Later, they renounced the household life, received the teachings of the Buddhist scriptures, and then began to realize it. These are people of medium faculties. The third type is people of inferior faculties. The heretics, upon hearing the refutation of the *Śataśāstra*, although verbally feeling refuted, still cannot realize it. Later, they study the Buddhist scriptures, but still cannot realize it. Not only can they not realize the Buddhist scriptures, but they become even more confused and attached to wrong views. Only after being refuted by the *Mūlamadhyamakakārikā* can they realize it. Question: Are there also people within the Buddhist path who, although hearing the refutation of the *Mūlamadhyamakakārikā*, cannot realize it, but begin to realize it upon hearing the refutation of the *Śataśāstra*? Answer: There is also this situation. Because the *Mūlamadhyamakakārikā* is profound and difficult to understand upon hearing it, the *Śataśāstra* discusses matters based on emotions, and is mysterious and concise, so it is easy to realize. Tenth, explaining the different lineages of the three treatises. Master Rui (Kumārajīva's disciple) said: There are sixteen great countries in India, each eighty *li* in circumference. In the year 350, the Bodhisattva Aśvaghoṣa (Buddhist master) appeared in the world, causing the Mahayana teachings to be reopened in Jambudvīpa (the world we live in). Five hundred and thirty years later, the Bodhisattva Nāgārjuna appeared in the world, propagating the path of non-form, and for the third time opening the teachings of the degenerate age. More than eight hundred years later, there was a person of the Brahmin caste named Āryadeva, who was Nāgārjuna's most outstanding disciple. They all shone alongside the mysterious teachers, and all had pure virtues, so they caused the Buddhist teachings to flourish and the heretical paths to be hidden. Question: Since the *Mūlamadhyamakakārikā* can be used as a standard of measurement, can the *Śataśāstra* also be used as a standard of measurement? Answer: Both the *Mūlamadhyamakakārikā* and the *Śataśāstra* can be used as standards of measurement. Question: If both can be used as standards of measurement, what else... --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
异。答若是中论即对偏辨中。若是中论即对邪辨中。所以然者。中论迷教之缘。学佛二谛不悟二不二。故成偏执。所以今破此偏二故。明不二之中也。若是百论不学佛教故。一向邪错。破此邪错以明中故。是破邪中也。 次第三约释论中论宗百论明秤中观论。今作离合两释也。前则离解三字。次则合释三字也。然虽复离释非是异义。虽复合释非是一义。所以然者。正为学人若闻合释即作一解。若闻离释则作异解。为此人故。所以言虽复离释非是异义。虽复合释非是一义。例如人闻波若如佛性法界涅槃便作异解。若闻波若即佛性法界即是涅槃便作一解。对此人故。明波若佛性法界涅槃虽复合非一。虽复离非是异也。 所言中者。以实为义。亦以五为义也。以实为义者。开中睿师云。以中为名者。然其实也。以正为义者。肇公正观论云。中即是正也。若以实为中义者。即名为实相实际。若以正为中义。即名正法正性也。问云何中以实为义。答正为失道之人。明学皆是虚妄。对此虚妄故名中实也。问何者是失道人。答通而为论。未见佛性。未观波若以来。并是虚妄也。断常中行故是失道人也。别而为言。有三种人。第一是失佛教人。言世谛是有真谛是无生死定断佛果定常。如此人等。即是虚妄也。第二自树之人 现代汉语译本： 问：‘异’是什么意思？答：如果是《中论》（Mūlamadhyamakakārikā，根本中论），那就是针对偏颇来辨明中道。如果是《中论》，那就是针对邪见来辨明中道。之所以这样说，是因为《中论》是针对迷惑于佛教教义的人，他们学习佛陀的二谛（真谛和俗谛）却不领悟二者不二的道理，因此形成了偏颇的执着。所以现在破除这种偏颇的二元对立，是为了阐明不二的中道。如果是《百论》（Śataśāstra，百论），则是针对那些不学习佛教教义，一味邪谬错误的人。破除这种邪谬错误是为了阐明中道，所以是破邪显中。 其次，第三种解释是约《释论》（Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa，大智度论）、《中论》、《百论》来阐明‘秤’（衡量）和‘中观论’。现在分别作离合两种解释。前面是分开解释这三个词，后面是合起来解释这三个词。然而，虽然是分开解释，但并非不同的含义；虽然是合起来解释，但并非相同的含义。之所以这样说，正是因为学习的人如果听到合起来解释，就只作一种理解；如果听到分开解释，就作不同的理解。为了这些人，所以说虽然是分开解释，但并非不同的含义；虽然是合起来解释，但并非相同的含义。例如，人们听到般若（Prajñā，智慧）、佛性（Buddhatā，如来藏）、法界（Dharmadhātu，宇宙万有）和涅槃（Nirvāṇa，寂灭）就作不同的理解；如果听到般若即是佛性、法界即是涅槃，就作一种理解。为了这些人，阐明般若、佛性、法界、涅槃虽然合起来并非相同，虽然分开也并非不同。 所说的‘中’，以‘实’为含义，也以‘五’为含义。以‘实’为含义，开中睿师说：‘以‘中’为名，是因为它是真实。’以‘正’为含义，肇公正观论说：‘中即是正。’如果以‘实’为‘中’的含义，就名为实相（Tathatā，真如）实际（Bhūtakoti，真如实际）。如果以‘正’为‘中’的含义，就名为正法（Saddharma，正法）正性（Dharmatā，法性）。问：为什么‘中’以‘实’为含义？答：正是为了那些迷失道路的人，说明他们所学的一切都是虚妄。针对这种虚妄，所以名为‘中实’。问：谁是迷失道路的人？答：总的来说，未见佛性、未观般若以来，都是虚妄。断常（常见和断见）中行（不落两边的中道修行）故是迷失道路的人。具体来说，有三种人。第一种是迷失佛教教义的人，他们说世谛（Saṃvṛti-satya，俗谛）是有，真谛（Paramārtha-satya，真谛）是无，生死（Saṃsāra，轮回）是断灭，佛果（Buddha-phala，成佛的果位）是常住。像这样的人，就是虚妄的。第二种是自立门户的人。