Chinese
大正藏第 85 册 No. 2782 大乘稻[〹/干]经随听疏 No. 2782 [cf. No. 712] 大乘稻芉经随听疏 沙门法成集 将释此经。总以五门分别。一立所宗。二明归乘。三明归分。四辩归藏。第五解释。如是五义。依大小乘经及以诸论。今当略释。 第一言立所宗者。世间宗见。虽有无量。以要言之。不出二种。一外。二内。彼外宗见有九十六。束而言之。有十六论。是故瑜伽论本地分中有寻伺等三地内云嗢柁南曰。执因中有果。显了有去来。我常宿作因。自在等害法。是无边憍乱。计无因断空。最胜净吉祥。名十六异论。彼长行解释云。由十六种异论差别。显不如理作意应知。何等十六。一因中有果论。二从缘显了论。三去来实有论。四计我论。五计常论。六宿作因论。七计自在等为作者论。八害为正法论。九有边无边论。十不死憍乱论。十一无因见论。十二断见论。十三空见论。十四妄计最胜论。十五妄计清净论。十六妄计吉祥论。如是诸论究竟而归二种之见。一断。二常。此十六论所有立破文繁不述。如瑜伽论二广明。言内宗者。总而言之有其二种。一小乘宗。二大乘宗。言小乘宗者大师在同一师学无有差别。佛灭度后为诸师等情见 现代汉语译本 大正藏第 85 册 No. 2782 大乘稻[〹/干]经随听疏 No. 2782 [cf. No. 712] 大乘稻芉经随听疏 沙门法成集 将要解释这部经，总共分为五个方面：一是确立宗旨，二是阐明归属的乘（yāna，佛教的交通工具，例如小乘，大乘），三是阐明归属的部（bhāga，部分），四是辨析归属的藏（piṭaka，佛教经典的总称），第五是进行解释。这五个方面，依据大乘和小乘的经典以及各种论著，现在我将简要地解释。 第一，说到确立宗旨。世间的各种宗派见解，虽然有无量之多，但如果要简要地说，不出两种：一是外道，二是内道。那些外道的宗派见解有九十六种，概括而言，有十六种论。因此，《瑜伽师地论》本地分中，在有寻有伺等三地内，提到一个纲要说：‘执着因中存在果，认为显现和了别有去来，我恒常存在，宿世的业是原因，自在天等是造作者，以损害为正法，认为世界有边或无边，不死而憍慢迷惑，计执无因而否定因果，持断灭见和空见，妄计有最殊胜和清净，以及吉祥。’这被称为十六种不同的论点。那段长行解释说：‘由于十六种不同论点的差别，应当知道不如理的作意。’哪十六种呢？一是因中有果论，二是因缘显了论，三是去来实有论，四是计我论（ātman，灵魂），五是计常论（nitya，永恒），六是宿作因论，七是计自在天（Īśvara）等为作者论，八是害为正法论，九是有边无边论，十是不死憍乱论，十一是无因见论，十二是断见论（uccheda-vāda，认为人死后一切皆无的理论），十三是空见论（śūnyatā-vāda，认为一切皆空的理论），十四是妄计最胜论，十五是妄计清净论，十六是妄计吉祥论。这些论点最终归结为两种见解：一是断见，二是常见。这十六种论点的所有立论和驳斥，文字繁多，这里不作叙述，可以参考《瑜伽师地论》第二部分进行广泛了解。说到内道宗派，总的来说有两种：一是小乘宗，二是大乘宗。说到小乘宗，大师们在同一位老师处学习，没有差别。佛陀灭度后，由于各位老师的情见
English
English version T. 85, No. 2782, Śālistamba Sūtra Commentary No. 2782 [cf. No. 712] Commentary on the Śālistamba Sūtra Compiled by the Śrāmaṇa (Buddhist monk) Facheng To explain this sūtra, I will divide it into five aspects: first, establishing the doctrine; second, clarifying the yāna (vehicle) to which it belongs; third, clarifying the bhāga (section) to which it belongs; fourth, distinguishing the piṭaka (collection of scriptures) to which it belongs; and fifth, providing an explanation. These five aspects are based on the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna sūtras and various treatises. Now, I will briefly explain them. First, regarding establishing the doctrine. Worldly sectarian views, although numerous, can be summarized into two types: external and internal. Those external sectarian views number ninety-six, which can be condensed into sixteen theses. Therefore, in the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra, in the Local Section, within the three grounds of investigation and analysis, there is a summary verse that says: ‘Clinging to the existence of the result in the cause, asserting that manifestation and discernment have coming and going, the self is permanent, past actions are the cause, Īśvara (the自在天) and others are the creators, harm is the correct dharma, the world is finite or infinite, immortality leads to arrogance and confusion, clinging to causelessness and denying causality, holding annihilationism (uccheda-vāda) and emptiness (śūnyatā-vāda), falsely claiming supremacy and purity, and auspiciousness.’ These are called the sixteen different theses. The extended explanation says: ‘Due to the differences in the sixteen types of theses, one should recognize the irrationality of their mental activity.’ What are the sixteen? First, the thesis of the result existing in the cause; second, the thesis of manifestation from conditions; third, the thesis of the real existence of coming and going; fourth, the thesis of the self (ātman); fifth, the thesis of permanence (nitya); sixth, the thesis of past actions as the cause; seventh, the thesis of Īśvara (自在天) and others as the creators; eighth, the thesis of harm as the correct dharma; ninth, the thesis of finitude or infinitude; tenth, the thesis of immortality leading to arrogance and confusion; eleventh, the thesis of causelessness; twelfth, the thesis of annihilationism (uccheda-vāda); thirteenth, the thesis of emptiness (śūnyatā-vāda); fourteenth, the thesis of falsely claiming supremacy; fifteenth, the thesis of falsely claiming purity; and sixteenth, the thesis of falsely claiming auspiciousness. These theses ultimately converge into two views: annihilationism and eternalism. The arguments for and against these sixteen theses are extensive and will not be elaborated here. Refer to the second part of the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra for a detailed understanding. Regarding internal schools, generally speaking, there are two types: the Hīnayāna school and the Mahāyāna school. Regarding the Hīnayāna school, the masters studied under the same teacher without difference. After the Buddha's parinirvana, due to the views of the various teachers --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
不同遂分多部。或有诸论本末合说有二十二。或有论说而本及末有二十部。广如二种宗轮论说。如是小乘部执虽多。毕竟归依皆同一见。何者是一。谓执一切法有实体性。所以者何。彼蕴界处体皆实故。若蕴等体实是无者。世尊不说诸大种等自相共相。又若色等法犹如兔角。非真实有唯有识者。为本无故内心变现有色等法不应道理。色等诸法若无有因不能生故。又若无因心能现者。龟毛兔角石女儿等亦应可得。又破外境故。而折粗法至于极微。又彼极微有方分故不成实故言唯识者。不应道理。分折识心前后诸分不成。实有同一遇故。不应而作如是之言。唯有内心而无外境。又佛世尊各别而说内外缘起缘性二种法故。心及外境是真实有。而诸经中而无外境唯识心者。彼欲为遮常见等故作如是说。中乘宗见与小乘同。二俱合说总名小乘。故不别论。余有立破。文繁不述。言大乘宗者亦有三别。一依经中宗。亦名胜义皆宗空。亦云破相宗。二唯识中宗。亦名应理圆实宗。亦云立相宗。三依论中宗。亦名法性圆融宗。亦云法性宗。言依经中宗者。佛灭度后六百岁来。部执竞兴。多著有见。谤大乘法。毁灭真宗。南天竺国。有一菩萨。出现于世。号为龙猛。证极喜地。为破有见。依大般若等大乘之经造中论等。后彼师弟子圣提婆 现代汉语译本： 由于见解不同，于是分裂成许多部派。有的论典将根本和末端合在一起说，共有二十二部。有的论典只说根本和末端，共有二十部。详细情况可以参考两种《宗轮论》的说法。虽然小乘各部派的执着很多，但最终都归于同一个见解。那是什么呢？就是认为一切法都有实体性。为什么这么说呢？因为他们认为蕴（skandha，构成个体的五种要素：色、受、想、行、识）、界（dhātu，十八界，即六根、六尘、六识）、处（āyatana，十二处，即六根、六境）的体性都是真实的。如果蕴等的体性不是真实的，世尊就不会说诸大种（mahābhūta，地、水、火、风四大元素）等的自相和共相。而且，如果色等法就像兔角一样，不是真实存在，只有识（vijñāna，意识）才是真实存在，因为本来没有，内心变现出有色等法，这就不合道理。色等诸法如果没有原因就不能产生。而且，如果没有原因，心就能显现，那么龟毛、兔角、石女儿等也应该可以得到。而且，为了破斥外境，将粗大的法分解到极微（paramāṇu，最小的物质单位）。而且，极微有方分，所以不是真实的。所以说‘唯识’是不合道理的。分解识心，前后的各个部分不能成立。因为真实存在同一个遭遇，所以不应该说只有内心而没有外境。而且，佛世尊分别说了内外缘起（pratītyasamutpāda，因缘生法）和缘性两种法，所以心和外境都是真实存在的。而有些经典中说没有外境，只有唯识心，那是为了遮止常见（śāśvatavāda，认为事物恒常不变的错误见解）等而这样说的。中乘（Madhyamaka，中观宗）的宗见与小乘相同，两者合在一起总称为小乘，所以不单独讨论。其余的建立和破斥，因为文字繁多，所以不叙述。 说到大乘（Mahāyāna）宗，也有三种区别：一是依经中宗，也叫胜义皆宗空，也叫破相宗；二是唯识中宗，也叫应理圆实宗，也叫立相宗；三是依论中宗，也叫法性圆融宗，也叫法性宗。说到依经中宗，佛灭度后六百年，各部派竞相兴起，大多执着于有见，诽谤大乘法，毁灭真宗。南天竺国，有一位菩萨（bodhisattva，指发菩提心，立志成佛的修行者）出现于世，号为龙猛（Nāgārjuna），证得极喜地（pramuditābhūmi，菩萨十地中的第一地），为了破斥有见，依据《大般若经》等大乘经典，造了《中论》等论著。后来他的师兄弟圣提婆（Āryadeva）。
English
English version: Differing in views, they then split into many schools. Some treatises combine the root and the end, totaling twenty-two parts. Some treatises only discuss the root and the end, totaling twenty parts. Details can be found in the two types of 'Śāriputrābhidharmaśāstra'. Although the attachments of the Hinayana schools are numerous, they ultimately converge on the same view. What is that? It is the belief that all dharmas (phenomena) have substantial existence. Why is this so? Because they believe that the skandhas (aggregates, the five components of an individual: form, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness), dhātus (elements, the eighteen elements: six sense organs, six sense objects, and six consciousnesses), and āyatanas (sense bases, the twelve sense bases: six sense organs and six sense objects) are all real in nature. If the nature of the skandhas, etc., were not real, the World-Honored One (Śākyamuni Buddha) would not have spoken of the self-characteristics and common characteristics of the mahābhūtas (great elements: earth, water, fire, and wind). Moreover, if dharmas such as form were like rabbit horns, not truly existent, and only consciousness (vijñāna) were real, because they originally did not exist, the mind manifesting colored dharmas, etc., would be unreasonable. Dharmas such as form cannot arise without a cause. Furthermore, if the mind could manifest without a cause, then things like turtle hair, rabbit horns, and stone daughters should also be obtainable. Moreover, to refute external objects, they analyze coarse dharmas down to the paramāṇus (ultimate particles, the smallest units of matter). And because the paramāṇus have spatial dimensions, they are not real. Therefore, the statement 'only consciousness' is unreasonable. Analyzing the mind of consciousness, the preceding and following parts cannot be established. Because the same encounter truly exists, it should not be said that there is only the mind and no external objects. Moreover, the World-Honored One Buddha separately spoke of both internal and external dependent origination (pratītyasamutpāda) and the nature of dependent origination, so both the mind and external objects are truly existent. And in some sutras that say there are no external objects, only the mind of consciousness, this is said to prevent views such as eternalism (śāśvatavāda). The views of the Madhyamaka (Middle Way) school are the same as those of the Hinayana, and the two are collectively called Hinayana, so they are not discussed separately. The remaining establishments and refutations are not described due to the abundance of text. Speaking of the Mahāyāna school, there are also three distinctions: first, the school based on the sutras, also called the ultimate meaning school, which all uphold emptiness; also called the school of breaking appearances; second, the school of consciousness-only, also called the school of reasoned and perfect reality, also called the school of establishing appearances; third, the school based on the treatises, also called the school of the nature of reality and perfect integration, also called the school of the nature of reality. Speaking of the school based on the sutras, six hundred years after the Buddha's parinirvana (death), various schools arose in competition, mostly clinging to views of existence, slandering the Mahāyāna Dharma, and destroying the true teachings. In South India, a bodhisattva (one who aspires to achieve Buddhahood) appeared in the world, named Nāgārjuna, who attained the pramuditābhūmi (the first of the ten bhūmis of a bodhisattva), and to refute views of existence, he composed treatises such as the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (Fundamental Verses on the Middle Way) based on Mahāyāna sutras such as the Prajñāpāramitā Sutra. Later, his fellow disciple Āryadeva. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
等诸大论抄。亦造百论等。广阐大义。是故因兹有此宗。起此宗见。云何以三无性为真了义。说一切法。世俗故有。胜义故空。谓一切法缘生有故。故名世俗。即彼缘生即彼缘生无性空故。故名胜义。胜义世俗其体不异。体不异故非空非有非空非有是中道理。得中道故不住二边。虽依世俗有所遣。修由观胜义而无所得止观双行成无住道故。依世俗说有三性。若胜义谛三无性皆无。由执世俗故说生死。令出离故说胜义谛。故无三性名。真了义更有立破。文繁不述。言唯识中宗者。既有如是前宗起故。由是众生复着空见。佛涅槃后九百年初无著菩萨而出于世。位登初地得法光定。破空见故造瑜伽等论。无著菩萨有异母弟。号为世亲。位阶加行。亦造三十论等。竖立唯识。故此宗起。此宗见云何。谓色等外法非真实有。唯识变现。世间及论所说有我及法种种。皆是内识转。似外境我法。分别重集力故。诸识生时变似我法。此我法相虽在内识。而由分别似外境现。诸有情类无始时来缘此执为实我实法。是故当知而无有境。所以者何。现见粗相微尘集成。而彼微尘有六方分。不成彼故无外境。如目有翳于虚空中见垂发等。又十地经云。诸胜最子三界唯心。又密严经云。内外一切物。所见唯自心。众生心二性。能取及所取。心体有 现代汉语译本 诸大论抄。也造了《百论》等，广泛阐述大乘教义。因此才有了这个宗派，产生了这种宗派见解。如何以三无性（sannihsvabhāvatā，指一切法无自性、无生、无灭）作为真正的究竟之义呢？说一切法，在世俗谛（saṃvṛti-satya，相对真理）上是存在的，在胜义谛（paramārtha-satya，绝对真理）上是空性的。因为一切法都是因缘和合而生起的，所以称为世俗谛；而这因缘生起的法，其自性本空，所以称为胜义谛。胜义谛和世俗谛的本体并非不同。本体不异，所以既非空也非有，这才是中道的道理。证得中道，就不会执着于空有二边。虽然依世俗谛有所舍弃和修习，但通过观胜义谛而无所得，止观双运行，成就无住之道。所以，依据世俗谛说有三性（trisvabhāva，遍计所执性、依他起性、圆成实性）。若依胜义谛，则三无性皆不存在。由于执着于世俗谛，所以才说生死轮回；为了使众生出离生死，才说胜义谛。所以，没有三性，才是真正的究竟之义。其中还有建立和破斥的论述，文字繁多，这里就不详细叙述了。 说到唯识宗，既然有了前面宗派的兴起，由于众生又执着于空见，所以在佛陀涅槃后九百年初，无著菩萨（Asaṅga）出世。他位登初地菩萨果位，证得法光定。为了破除空见，他造了《瑜伽师地论》等论著。无著菩萨有个同父异母的弟弟，名为世亲（Vasubandhu），位阶加行位。也造了《唯识三十颂》等论著，竖立了唯识的教义。所以这个宗派才兴起。这个宗派的见解是什么呢？就是说色等外在的法并非真实存在，而是唯识所变现的。世间以及论典中所说的我（ātman）和法（dharma）种种，都是内在的识所转变，相似于外在的境，我法分别的串习力量所致。诸识生起时，变现出相似于我法的形象。这我法的形象虽然在内在的识中，但由于分别，而显现为外在的境界。诸有情众生从无始以来，缘着这些现象执着为真实的我、真实的法。所以应当知道，实际上并没有外在的境界。为什么这么说呢？现在可以清楚地看到粗大的物体是由微尘聚集而成，而这些微尘有六方分，不能构成那个粗大的物体，所以没有外在的境界。就像眼睛有翳病的人，在虚空中看到垂发等幻象一样。《十地经》中说：‘诸胜最子，三界唯心。’《密严经》中说：‘内外一切物，所见唯自心。众生心二性，能取及所取。心体有’。