English
English version: Ti Duan (untraceable). Enduring the characteristics of names and forms, the foremost Dharma in the world transcends birth and death. Twelve mind moments arise, called 'approaching'. The thirteenth mind moment is called 'abiding in the fruit'. It is associated with the Dṛṣṭānta (Illustrations) of the Saṃmitīya (Sammitiya school) and the six cities (untraceable). There are various verses that speak differently about these. They can be explained separately, but one may fall again. Having fallen, one deeply clings. From past karma, one obtains new karma. The fundamental view of the Mahīśāsaka (Mahishasaka school) is: there is no past or future; only the present and the unconditioned exist. Regarding the Four Noble Truths, there is no difference in understanding. Seeing suffering is called 'seeing'. Understanding the Truth of Suffering is called 'seeing the Truth'. The afflictions (kleśas) are not the mind. There are no conditions. Afflictions are different from bonds (bandhanas), and bonds are different from afflictions. Bonds that do not correspond to the mind correspond to the mind. Ordinary people should not have anger. Non-Buddhists do not have the five supernormal powers (abhijñās). Devas (gods) cannot practice the pure conduct (brahmacarya). There is no intermediate existence (antarābhava). Arhats (worthy ones) do not have an increase in merit. The five consciousnesses (vijñānas) can have desire and also be free from desire. The sixth consciousness (mano-vijñāna) corresponds to initial and sustained thought (vitarka and vicāra). There is no mundane right view. There is no mundane root of faith. There is no supramundane dhyana (meditation). There is no realization of supramundane Dharma. There is no good as a cause. A Srota-āpanna (stream-enterer) can regress. An Arhat can also regress. The limbs of the path (aṣṭāṅgika-mārga) are included in the mindfulness (smṛti). There are nine unconditioned things, namely Saṃkhyā-nirodha (cessation through knowledge), Asaṃkhyā-nirodha (cessation without knowledge), Ākāśa (space), and good dharmas. Unwholesome dharmas are like indeterminate dharmas. Like the arising of the path. Like from birth to death. The four great elements (mahābhūtas) and the faculties (indriyas) transform and self-extinguish. Mental factors (citta-caitta) also transform and self-extinguish. One can give to the Sangha (community) within the Buddha and the Sangha. One obtains great merit, not the Buddha. The Buddha and the Śrāvakas (hearers) are the same. There is one path, one liberation, and all actions are momentary. No Dharma passes from this world to another world. These are the same fundamental views. These intermediate views hold that: there is past and future. There is an intermediate existence, including entering the womb, knowing the Dharma, recognizing the Dharma, and thinking about karma. There is no bodily or verbal karma; initial and sustained thought correspond to the mind. Tai Di Zhu Jie (untraceable). Offering to stupas (reliquary mounds), a small amount of meritorious Dharma will appear. Name, afflictions, aggregates, realms, and entrances will appear. Past seeds of Dharma can produce various sufferings, namely Avidyā (ignorance), Tṛṣṇā (craving), wrong views, and karma. This is called the intermediate view. The fundamental view of the Dharmaguptaka (Dharmaguptaka school) is: one cannot give to the Sangha within the Buddha and the Sangha. The Buddha obtains great merit, not the Sangha. The Buddha's path is different from the Śrāvaka's path. Non-Buddhists do not have the five supernormal powers. The body of an Arhat is unconditioned. All other views are the same as the Mahāsaṃghika (Mahasanghika school). The fundamental view of the Kāśyapīya (Kashyapiya school) is: there is cessation of Dharma and cessation of knowledge. There is no non-cessation of Dharma that ceases. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
知。业熟而受报。不熟不受报。有过去因果。无有未来因果。有一切法刹那。有觉法有报。余一切与昙无德部同见。 彼相续部根本见者。阴从此世至他世。非离圣道得灭阴。阴有约根本。有第一人。余一切与萨婆多部见同。是略说一切部见。 十八部论一卷 按此论者宋藏中错重写。彼部异执论。名为十八部论故今取此国本为正。开元录云右十八部论群录并云。梁代三藏真谛所译。今详真谛三藏已译十八部论。不合更译部异执论。其十八部论初首引文殊问经分别部品。后次云罗什法师集后方是论。若是罗什所翻。秦时未有文殊问经。不合引之置于初也。或可准别录中文殊问经编为失译。秦时引证此亦无疑。若是真谛再译。论中子注不合有秦言之字。详其文理多是秦时罗什译出。诸录脱编致有疑焉。其真谛十八部疏。即部异执疏是虽有斯理未敢指南。后诸博闻请求实录。 现代汉语译本： 知晓。业成熟了就接受果报，不成熟就不接受果报。有过去的因果，没有未来的因果。一切法都是刹那生灭的，有觉悟之法，有果报。其余一切观点与昙无德部（Dharmaguptaka）相同。 相续部（Samkrantika）的根本观点是：蕴（Skandha）从这一世传递到下一世。不通过圣道就无法灭尽蕴。蕴有根本，有第一人（Pudgala）。其余一切观点与萨婆多部（Sarvastivada）相同。以上是简略地说明一切部的观点。 《十八部论》一卷 按：此论在宋藏中错误地重复书写了。彼部异执论，被错误地命名为《十八部论》，所以现在采用此国（指中国）的版本作为正确的版本。《开元录》记载右《十八部论》群录都说是梁代三藏真谛（Paramārtha）所译。现在详细考察，真谛三藏已经翻译了《十八部论》，不应该再翻译《部异执论》。《十八部论》的开头引用了《文殊问经》分别部品，然后接着说是鸠摩罗什（Kumārajīva）法师所集，之后才是论。如果是鸠摩罗什所翻译，秦代（公元前221年-公元206年）还没有《文殊问经》，不应该引用它放在开头。或许可以按照别录中将《文殊问经》编为失译，秦代引用它也没有疑问。如果是真谛再次翻译，论中的子注不应该有秦代语言的字。详细考察其文理，大多是秦代鸠摩罗什翻译出来的。各目录脱漏编排导致产生疑问。至于真谛的《十八部疏》，即《部异执疏》，虽然有这个道理，但不敢轻易下结论。希望后来的博学之士请求核实记录。
English
English version: It is known. When karma matures, one receives the retribution; if it does not mature, one does not receive the retribution. There is past cause and effect, but there is no future cause and effect. All dharmas are momentary, there is the dharma of awakening, and there is retribution. All other views are the same as those of the Dharmaguptaka school. The fundamental view of the Samkrantika school is that the skandhas (aggregates) pass from this life to the next. The skandhas cannot be extinguished without the Noble Path. There is a fundamental aspect to the skandhas, and there is a Pudgala (person). All other views are the same as those of the Sarvastivada school. The above is a brief explanation of the views of all the schools. The Treatise on the Eighteen Schools, one volume. Note: This treatise was mistakenly rewritten in the Song Dynasty (960-1279) collection. The 'Treatise on the Different Tenets of the Schools' was mistakenly named 'Treatise on the Eighteen Schools,' so now this country's (China) version is taken as the correct version. The Kaiyuan Catalogue records that the group of records on the 'Treatise on the Eighteen Schools' all say that it was translated by the Tripiṭaka master Paramārtha of the Liang Dynasty (502-557). Now, upon detailed examination, the Tripiṭaka master Paramārtha has already translated the 'Treatise on the Eighteen Schools,' so he should not have translated the 'Treatise on the Different Tenets of the Schools' again. The beginning of the 'Treatise on the Eighteen Schools' quotes the 'Chapter on Distinctions' from the 'Mañjuśrī Questions Sutra,' and then it says that it was compiled by the Dharma master Kumārajīva, and only then is it the treatise. If it was translated by Kumārajīva, there was no 'Mañjuśrī Questions Sutra' in the Qin Dynasty (221-206 BC), so it should not have been quoted at the beginning. Perhaps, according to the separate record, the 'Mañjuśrī Questions Sutra' can be classified as a lost translation, and there is no doubt that it was quoted in the Qin Dynasty. If Paramārtha translated it again, there should not be characters from the Qin Dynasty language in the sub-notes of the treatise. Upon detailed examination of its wording, it was mostly translated by Kumārajīva in the Qin Dynasty. Omissions in the various catalogues have led to doubts. As for Paramārtha's commentary on the 'Treatise on the Eighteen Schools,' which is the commentary on the 'Treatise on the Different Tenets of the Schools,' although there is this reasoning, I dare not make a hasty conclusion. I hope that later learned scholars will request verification of the records. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------