English
English version: The emptiness of blue, yellow, etc., which has no substance, is not the blue, yellow itself, hence the saying 'not identical to emptiness'. This points out its emptiness without substance to negate form, clarifying that emptiness is not existence. Is it not clear enough? The three types of form are not emptiness because they are emptiness. Why? Because there is no form in emptiness, hence the saying 'not identical to emptiness'. Understanding that form has no substance, therefore it is emptiness (this is an explanation). Precisely because understanding that form returns to emptiness, there must be no form in emptiness—this is a definitive statement. The *Heart Sutra* says: 'Therefore, in emptiness, there is no form, no sensation, perception, volition, or consciousness, no twelve entrances, no eighteen realms, no twelve links of dependent origination, no four noble truths, etc.' The *Shurangama Sutra* says: 'How can other things be contained within it?' Therefore, because form is empty (non-existent), form is not empty (true). The above are all explanations of the immediate phrase. The above three doors have completed the differentiation of emotions using the Dharma. This is a summary of the three doors. Four, form is emptiness. Why? All forms are necessarily not different from true emptiness, because all forms necessarily have no self-nature (arising from conditions, dependent on others and without self-nature, which is perfect completion). Therefore, form is emptiness. It is neither destroying form to preserve emptiness, nor is it neither identical nor different, hence the saying 'identical to true emptiness'. Emptiness is not form, there is no conceptual proliferation. Dependent origination is without self-nature, and the truth of no self-nature is perfect reality. The ancients said: 'When form departs, it leaves no emptiness; emptiness does not dwell on the side of existence.' If form and emptiness are like this, then all dharmas are also like this. Think about it! Form is the head of all dharmas and the beginning of the five aggregates. Therefore, in all sutras, whenever one wants to explain the meaning of emptiness, it is explained in terms of form. For example, the *Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra* lists more than eighty categories, all using form as an example. To point out the essentials, it includes the beings of the six realms, as well as the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas of the ten directions, the two vehicles, the five aggregates, the twelve entrances, and the eighteen realms. This school believes that defilement and purity have no two aspects, so it should be said that sensation, perception, volition, and consciousness are not identical to nihilistic emptiness, etc. The texts about blue and yellow refer to the aspects of reception, etc., which are not the principles of true emptiness, etc. Even the Buddhas refer to the aspects of supernatural powers and light, etc., which are not the principles of true emptiness, etc. Therefore, the *Tathagata* cannot be seen through physical form. Second, to clarify that emptiness is form. The observer also has four doors within it—to differentiate emotions and reveal understanding. This is a marker. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
徴释结等。一一如前。四门但文势相翻。以成后文空色无碍。泯绝无寄。当般若心经空即是色等文也。唯第三句。非敌对相翻。义亦不异。一一反上以成中道更无别义也。 一空不即色以空即色故何以故断空不即是色故云非色 释上句也。 真空必不异色故云空即色 释下句也。 要由真空即色 结下句也。 故令断空不即色也 结上句也。 二空不即色以空即色故何以故以空理非青黄故云不即色 释上句也。 然不异青黄故言空即色 释下句也。 要由不异青黄。故不即青黄 结释。 故云。即色不即色也 结标。 三空不即色以空即色故何以故空是所依非能依故不即色 释上句也。对上空中无色。无色方是色之所依故。如镜中之明无影也。 必与能依作所依故即是色也 释下句也。无色故能与色为依。如镜中之明。无影像故。方能与影像作所依也。故不即是影。此不敌对反上文者。以空中无色。有理有文。色中无空。文理俱绝。故但约能所依持而简也。有理者。摩尼珠中。必无黑等色。有文者。如上所引。经云。是故空中无色。无受想等也。理绝者。珠所现色。色处必有明珠也。文绝者。诸圣教中。悉不见有色中无空之文也。 良由是所依 现代汉语译本： 徵释结等（徵：征引，释：解释，结：结论）：一一如前。四门但文势相翻，以成后文空色无碍，泯绝无寄。当《般若心经》‘空即是色’等文也。唯第三句，非敌对相翻，义亦不异。一一反上以成中道，更无别义也。 一、空不即色，以空即色故。何以故？断空不即是色，故云非色——释上句也。 真空必不异色，故云空即色——释下句也。 要由真空即色——结下句也。 故令断空不即色也——结上句也。 二、空不即色，以空即色故。何以故？以空理非青黄，故云不即色——释上句也。 然不异青黄，故言空即色——释下句也。 要由不异青黄，故不即青黄——结释。 故云：即色不即色也——结标。 三、空不即色，以空即色故。何以故？空是所依，非能依故，不即色——释上句也。对上空中无色，无色方是色之所依故。如镜中之明无影也。 必与能依作所依，故即是色也——释下句也。无色故能与色为依。如镜中之明，无影像故，方能与影像作所依也。故不即是影。此不敌对反上文者，以空中无色，有理有文。色中无空，文理俱绝。故但约能所依持而简也。有理者，摩尼珠中（摩尼珠：一种宝珠），必无黑等色。有文者，如上所引，经云：‘是故空中无色，无受想等也。’理绝者，珠所现处，必有明珠也。文绝者，诸圣教中，悉不见有色中无空之文也。 良由是所依
English
English version: Explanation of 'distinguishing, interpreting, concluding,' etc.: Each is as before. The four aspects are merely reversals of the textual momentum, to establish the unobstructed nature of emptiness and form in the subsequent text, a complete and unattached transcendence. This corresponds to the passage in the *Heart Sutra* 'Form is exactly emptiness,' etc. Only the third statement is not a direct reversal, but its meaning is not different. Each reverses the preceding to establish the Middle Way, with no other meaning. 1. 'Emptiness is not identical to form, because emptiness is identical to form.' Why? Because the severance of emptiness is not identical to form, therefore it is said to be 'not form' – Explaining the preceding statement. 'True emptiness is necessarily not different from form,' therefore it is said 'emptiness is identical to form' – Explaining the following statement. 'It must be due to true emptiness being identical to form' – Concluding the following statement. 'Therefore, it causes the severance of emptiness to not be identical to form' – Concluding the preceding statement. 2. 'Emptiness is not identical to form, because emptiness is identical to form.' Why? Because the principle of emptiness is not blue or yellow, therefore it is said 'not identical to form' – Explaining the preceding statement. 'Yet it is not different from blue or yellow,' therefore it is said 'emptiness is identical to form' – Explaining the following statement. 'It must be due to not being different from blue or yellow, therefore it is not identical to blue or yellow' – Concluding explanation. 'Therefore, it is said: identical to form, not identical to form' – Concluding statement. 3. 'Emptiness is not identical to form, because emptiness is identical to form.' Why? Because emptiness is the supported (所依), not the supporter (能依), therefore it is not identical to form – Explaining the preceding statement. Corresponding to the above, 'in emptiness there is no form,' only when there is no form can it be the supported of form. Like the clarity in a mirror without a reflection. 'It must act as the supported for the supporter, therefore it is identical to form' – Explaining the following statement. Because there is no form, it can be the support for form. Like the clarity in a mirror, without an image, it can be the supported for the image. Therefore, it is not identical to the image. This is not a direct reversal of the preceding text because in emptiness there is no form, there is both principle and text. In form there is no emptiness, both text and principle are cut off. Therefore, it is simplified by only discussing the supported and the supporter. There is principle: in a *Mani jewel* (摩尼珠: a wish-fulfilling jewel), there is necessarily no black or other colors. There is text: as quoted above, the sutra says: 'Therefore, in emptiness there is no form, no sensation, etc.' The principle is cut off: where the jewel appears, there must be a bright jewel. The text is cut off: in all the sacred teachings, there is no text that says 'in form there is no emptiness.' It is truly because it is the supported. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
故不即色是所依故即是色(结释)是故由不即色。故即色也 以义结标。 上三门亦以法简情讫。 四空即是色何以故凡是真空必不异色以是法无我理 即真空体也。谓二空所显之真如也。 非断灭故 真如不守自性也。上皆释竟。 是故空即是色 结也。 如空色既尔一切法皆然思之 真空既不异色。亦不异一切法也。如前所例。 第三。空色无碍观 虽有空色二字。本意唯归于空。以色是虚名虚相。无纤毫之体。故修此观者。意在此故也。文中举色为首云空现。举空为首不言色现。还云空不隐也。是故但名真空观。不言真空妄色观。 谓色举体不异空全是尽色之空故则色尽而空现空举体不异色全是尽空之色故则空即色而空不隐也 色空之文。各有二句。皆先标无碍所以。下出无碍之相。谓若色是实色。即碍于空。空是断空。即碍于色。今既色是幻色。故不碍空。空是真空。故不碍色也。有本云。色不尽而空现。亦通。然不如无。 是故菩萨看色无不见空观空莫非见色无障无碍为一味法思之可见。 第四泯绝无寄观 文二。初释此观。后总辨四门。初中二。初正泯绝。后徴释所以。初中文云不可等者。既本文自释。今不注亦得。后文势展转不同。今亦略别 现代汉语译本：因此，不是离开色而有所依，所以说即是色（总结解释）。因此，由于不是离开色，所以说即是色。用义理来总结标明。 以上三门也用佛法来简别情见完毕。 四空即是色，为什么呢？凡是真空必定不异于色，这是因为法无我的道理，即是真空的本体。指的是二空所显现的真如。 不是断灭的缘故，真如不守自性。以上全部解释完毕。 因此，空即是色（结论）。 如同空和色这样，一切法都是如此，思考它。真空既然不异于色，也不异于一切法。如同前面所举的例子。 第三，空色无碍观。虽然有空色二字，本意唯独归于空。因为色是虚名虚相，没有丝毫的实体。所以修此观的人，意在此处。文中举色为首说空显现，举空为首不说色显现，还说空不隐没。因此只名为真空观，不名为真空妄色观。 意思是色举整体不异于空，全是尽色的空，所以色尽而空显现；空举整体不异于色，全是尽空的色，所以空即是色而空不隐没。色空的文句，各有两句。都先标明无碍的所以然，下面阐述无碍的相状。意思是如果色是实色，就会障碍空；空是断空，就会障碍色。现在既然色是幻色，所以不妨碍空；空是真空，所以不妨碍色。有的版本说，‘色不尽而空现’，也说得通。然而不如没有。 因此，菩萨看色没有不见空的，观空没有不是见色的，没有障碍，没有阻碍，成为一体之法，思考它就可以明白。 第四，泯绝无寄观。分为两部分。首先解释此观，然后总辨四门。初中又分二，先是正泯绝，后是征释所以。初中文句‘不可等者’，既然本文自己解释，现在不注释也可以。后面的文势辗转不同，现在也略作分别。