English
English version: 'Li Sheng' (Detachment from rebirth). Not yet transcending the stage of 'Fanfu Di Shou Shen' (ordinary being receiving a body). The establishment of the number of sentient beings, the annihilation of all actions cannot be described. From this life to the next life, the secular saying is that there is a saying from this life to the next life. Life has not ended, all actions have been exhausted, and there is no law that can be transformed. There is 'Chu Shi Jian Chan' (transcendental meditation), there is awakening, there is observation, 'Wu Lou' (without outflows) and goodness, this is the reason for meditation, and there are no words to express in meditation. The Eightfold Noble Path is the Dharma wheel. Not everything said by the Tathagata is turning the Dharma wheel. The Buddha does not say everything, and not all sayings conform to the true meaning. Not all sutras are definitive sutras. There are such countless intermediate views. The fundamental view of the 'Xue Shan Bu' (Himavata school, a Buddhist school) is: Bodhisattvas and ordinary beings are free from ignorance, purify the Buddha's land, and are born in the womb of a divine mother. Non-Buddhists do not have the five supernormal powers. Devas cannot practice Brahma conduct. There are Arhats who receive benefits from others, without ignorance and doubt, and attain enlightenment through the observation and speech of others. All other views of the 'Sarvastivada' (a Buddhist school) are the same. The fundamental view of the 'Vatsiputriya' (a Buddhist school) is: it is not exactly a person, nor is it separated from the 'Yin Jie' (skandhas and realms), but enters a state of combination and establishment. All 'Yin' (skandhas) do not stay for a moment. Without a person, there is no law. From this life to the next life, it should be said that the person has arrived there. Non-Buddhists have the five supernormal powers. The five consciousnesses are neither with desire nor without desire. The 'Jie Shi' (fetters) of the desire realm are cut off through cultivation and detachment from desire, not through 'Jian Di' (seeing the truth). 'Ren Ming Xiang' (patience is called form), the world's first Dharma transcends and sublimates, detaching from rebirth. The arising of twelve thoughts is called 'Xiang' (towards), and the thirteenth thought is called 'Zhu Guo' (abiding in the fruit). It is related to the six cities of 'Jian Zhe Duo Li Luo Ye Ni San Mi Ti' (the seer, Tarayana, Samiti). Some special verses are explained separately, but they fall again, and after falling, they are deeply attached, and they obtain karma from actions. The fundamental view of the 'Mahisasaka' (a Buddhist school) is: there is no past and future life, only the present and 'Wu Wei' (non-action). Regarding the Four Noble Truths, observe them without interruption. Seeing suffering is called seeing, and the one who sees suffering is called seeing the true truth. The 'Shi' (afflictions) are not the mind, and the mind is not conditioned. 'Shi' (afflictions) and 'Chan' (bonds) are different, and 'Chan' is also different from 'Shi'. The 'Chan' that does not correspond to the mind corresponds to the mind. Ordinary people do not desire anger. Non-Buddhists do not have the five supernormal powers. Devas cannot practice Brahma conduct. There is no 'Zhong Yin' (intermediate state between death and rebirth). Arhats do not have an increase in merit. The five consciousnesses have desire and are also detached from desire. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
六识身觉观相应。无有世俗正见。无世俗信根。无有出世间禅。无觉出世间法。无有善为因。须陀洹有退法。阿罗汉亦有退法。道支是念处摄。有九无为事。谓数灭非数灭虚空善法也。不善法如无记法。如道缘起。如从胎乃至死。诸根四大转变自灭。心心数法亦转变自灭。佛僧中可得施僧。得大果报非佛。佛与声闻同。一道一解脱一切行刹那。无有法从此世至他世。如是等根本见同。此等诸中间见者。有过去未来世。有中阴法入知法识法思业。无有身业口业觉观心相应。太地住劫。供养偷婆少果报法现在前。名使阴界入现在前。已法种子能生诸苦。谓无明渴爱见业。是名中间见法也。 彼昙无德根本见者。佛非僧中可得施。佛得大果报非僧。佛道异声闻道。外道无有五通。罗汉身是无漏余。一切与摩诃僧祇部同见也。 彼迦叶惟部根本见者。有断法断知。无有不断法而断知。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 现代汉语译本：六识与身觉的观察相应。没有世俗的正见。没有世俗的信根。没有出世间的禅定。没有觉悟出世间法。没有以善为因。须陀洹（Sotapanna，入流者）有退转的可能。阿罗汉（Arhat，应供）也有退转的可能。道支属于念处所摄。有九种无为法，即数灭、非数灭、虚空、善法。不善法如同无记法。如同道缘起。如同从胎儿到死亡。诸根、四大转变而自然消灭。心和心所法也转变而自然消灭。在佛和僧众中可以对僧众进行布施，得到大的果报，但不能对佛进行布施。佛与声闻（Sravaka，弟子）相同。一道一解脱，一切行都是刹那生灭。没有法从这个世界到另一个世界。这些是根本见解相同之处。这些中间见解认为，有过去和未来世。有中阴身。有入知法、识法、思业。没有身业和口业与觉观心相应。大地住劫。供养佛塔（Stupa）所得果报少。现在前的事物被称为使、阴、界、入现在前。已有的法种子能产生诸苦，即无明、渴爱、见、业。这些被称为中间见解。 昙无德部（Dharmaguptaka）的根本见解是：不能在僧众中对佛进行布施。对佛的布施能得到大的果报，但对僧众的布施不能。佛道与声闻道不同。外道没有五神通。阿罗汉的身是无漏的。其他一切见解与大众部（Mahasamghika）相同。 迦叶惟部（Kasyapiya）的根本见解是：有断法断知。没有不断法而断知。业成熟而受报，不成熟不受报。有过去因果，没有未来因果。一切法都是刹那生灭。有觉法有报。其他一切见解与昙无德部相同。 相续部（Samkrantika）的根本见解是：阴（Skandha，五蕴）从此世到他世。不离圣道不能灭阴。阴有根本。有第一人。其他一切见解与萨婆多部（Sarvastivada）相同。以上是简略地说明一切部派的见解。 《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。
English
English version: The six consciousnesses correspond with the observation of bodily sensation. There is no mundane right view. There is no mundane root of faith. There is no supramundane meditation. There is no enlightenment of supramundane Dharma. There is no cause rooted in goodness. A Sotapanna (stream-enterer) has the possibility of regression. An Arhat (worthy one) also has the possibility of regression. The limb of the path is included in the mindfulness establishments. There are nine unconditioned things, namely cessation through knowledge, cessation without knowledge, space, and good dharmas. Unwholesome dharmas are like indeterminate dharmas. Like the arising of the path. Like from the womb until death. The sense faculties and the four great elements transform and naturally perish. Mental states and mental factors also transform and naturally perish. One can give to the Sangha (community) within the Buddha and the Sangha, obtaining great rewards, but not to the Buddha. The Buddha and the Sravakas (hearers) are the same. One path, one liberation, all actions are momentary. There is no dharma that goes from this world to another world. These are the fundamental views that are the same. These intermediate views hold that there are past and future lives. There is an intermediate state (Bardo). There is the entering of knowing dharma, recognizing dharma, thinking karma. There is no bodily karma or verbal karma corresponding to perception and mental activity. The great earth abides for an eon. Offering to a Stupa (reliquary mound) yields little reward. What is presently arising is called the arising of the fetters, aggregates, realms, and sense bases. Seeds of already existing dharmas can produce all sufferings, namely ignorance, craving, views, and karma. These are called intermediate views. The fundamental view of the Dharmaguptaka (school) is: one cannot give to the Buddha within the Sangha. Giving to the Buddha yields great rewards, but not giving to the Sangha. The Buddha's path is different from the Sravaka's path. Non-Buddhists do not have the five supernormal powers. The body of an Arhat is without outflows. All other views are the same as the Mahasamghika (school). The fundamental view of the Kasyapiya (school) is: there is cutting off of dharma and cutting off of knowledge. There is no cutting off of knowledge without cutting off of dharma. Karma ripens and is experienced, if it does not ripen, it is not experienced. There is past cause and effect, there is no future cause and effect. All dharmas are momentary. There is awareness of dharma and there is reward. All other views are the same as the Dharmaguptaka (school). The fundamental view of the Samkrantika (school) is: the Skandhas (aggregates) go from this world to another world. One cannot extinguish the Skandhas without leaving the noble path. The Skandhas have a root. There is a first person. All other views are the same as the Sarvastivada (school). The above is a brief explanation of the views of all the schools. 《Treatise on the Eighteen Schools》, one fascicle According to this treatise, it was mistakenly rewritten in the Song Dynasty collection. The treatise on the differing views of those schools is called 《Treatise on the Eighteen Schools》, therefore it is taken now. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
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：这个国家的根本在于正统。开元录中记载，右十八部论群录都说是梁代三藏真谛（Paramārtha）所翻译。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》。这十八部论最初引用了《文殊问经》来分别部派，之后又说是鸠摩罗什（Kumārajīva）法师收集的，然后才是论。如果是鸠摩罗什所翻译，秦朝时还没有《文殊问经》，不应该在最初引用它。或许可以参照别录中将《文殊问经》编为失译，秦朝时引用它也没有疑问。如果是真谛再次翻译，论中的子注不应该有秦朝语言的字。详细考察其文理，大多是秦朝鸠摩罗什翻译出来的。各种目录编排脱漏导致产生疑问。至于真谛的十八部疏，也就是《部异执疏》，即使有这个道理，也不敢直接下结论。以后希望各位博学之士请求核实记录。
English
English version: The foundation of this country lies in righteousness. The Kaiyuan Catalogue records that the collected records of the 'Right Eighteen Treatises' all state that they were translated by the Tripiṭaka master Paramārtha of the Liang dynasty. Upon closer examination, Tripiṭaka master Paramārtha had already translated the Eighteen Treatises; he should not have translated the *Treatise on the Different Assertions of the Sects* (部异执论). These Eighteen Treatises initially cite the *Mañjuśrī's Questions Sutra* (文殊问经) to differentiate the schools, and then state that it was compiled by Dharma Master Kumārajīva (鸠摩罗什), followed by the treatise itself. If it was translated by Kumārajīva, the *Mañjuśrī's Questions Sutra* did not exist during the Qin dynasty, so it should not have been cited at the beginning. Perhaps, according to another record, the *Mañjuśrī's Questions Sutra* could be classified as a lost translation, and there would be no doubt about its citation during the Qin dynasty. If Paramārtha translated it again, the sub-commentaries in the treatise should not contain characters from the Qin dynasty language. Examining its wording in detail, it seems mostly translated by Kumārajīva during the Qin dynasty. Errors in the compilation of various catalogues have led to these doubts. As for Paramārtha's commentary on the Eighteen Treatises, which is the *Commentary on the Different Assertions of the Sects* (部异执疏), even if there is this reasoning, I would not dare to draw a direct conclusion. In the future, I hope that learned individuals will request verification of the records. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------