Chinese
尽。名义无碍辩。诸佛如来随机设教。性相咸说无有疑碍。名法无碍辩。如来所说辞义多端。一音演说随类得解。巧便多慧恒无厌惓。所设辞理无有蹇涩。名为辨说。所说之法无有拥滞。目之无碍(云云)。 曷空有之异辙奚广略之殊途 喻此记千□一辙万□ 曷者何也。辙者途路也。空有之名密意权说。论兹究极有空不殊。有即蕴实约执见论。空即假成悟性非有。明知迷悟自别源体空有非殊。广略之言实亦无二。悟则四句便足不假多求略也。迷乃虽读万卷真言。还同坠妄广也。但利钝有殊广略无二。奚者何也(云云)。 究其本者必同味于百川滞其末者竞纷流于五谤 言究其本者。究者穷也。本者体也。亡名绝相也。真理也。取通会为言。若本得其源。则知众流归同一海。尝大海之滴水。则知众流之味 言滞其末者。滞由迷也。末者执空有教法之徒。约偏执论也。二夜经云。某夜成正觉某夜般涅槃。于此二中间。我都无所说。不说是佛说若言如来有所说法。即为谤佛。不能解我所说义。明知本体之法言诠。所不及。是心欲思而虑亡。口欲言而辞丧。不可以智知。不可以识识。辄有僻见之流立斯五谤。且五谤名目。一增益谤。二损减谤。三相违谤。四戏论谤。五愚废谤。如是五谤一一说者。一言诸法有。 现代汉语译本 穷尽。名义无碍辩（对名相和义理通达无碍的辩才）。诸佛如来根据不同情况随机施教，对事物的体性和现象全面解说，没有疑惑和障碍，这是名法无碍辩（对名相和法则通达无碍的辩才）。如来说法，辞句和义理丰富多样，用一种声音演说，各种众生都能理解，巧妙方便，智慧充足，永不厌倦，所说的辞句和义理没有阻碍，这叫做辨说。所说的法没有壅塞停滞，这叫做无碍（等等）。 空和有的不同路径，广和略的差异在哪里？用这个来比喻，记载一千件事，一万件事，最终都归于同一个道理。曷（hé）是什么意思？辙（zhé）是道路的意思。空和有的名称，是秘密的意图和权宜的说法。如果探究到最终极的道理，有和空并没有什么不同。说‘有’，是针对蕴积和实在，是就执着和偏见而言。说‘空’，是说事物是因缘假合而成，悟道的自性并非实有。明白了，就知道迷惑和觉悟本来不同，但从本源上说，空和有并没有区别。广和略的说法，实际上也没有什么不同。觉悟了，四句话就足够了，不需要再多求，这就是‘略’。迷惑了，即使读了万卷真言，也还是和坠入虚妄一样，这就是‘广’。只是众生的根器有迟钝和敏锐的差别，广和略实际上并没有不同。奚（xī）是什么意思（等等）。 探究事物的根本，必然会像百川归海一样味道相同；停留在事物的末端，就会像五种诽谤一样争论不休。说‘探究事物的根本’，探究，是穷尽的意思。根本，是本体的意思，是超越名相的，是真理。从通达和融会的角度来说，如果把握住了根本，就会知道所有的河流都归于同一个大海，尝过大海中的一滴水，就知道所有河流的味道都一样。说‘停留在事物的末端’，停滞是因为迷惑。末端，是指执着于空和有教法的那些人，是就他们的偏执而言。《二夜经》说：‘某夜我成就正觉，某夜我入般涅槃，在这两个夜晚之间，我什么也没说。’不说就是佛说，如果说如来有所说法，那就是诽谤佛，因为不能理解我所说的意义。明白本体的法是言语所不能表达的，是心思想要思考却无法思考，口想要说却无法说出的，不可以用智来知，不可以用识来识。那些有偏颇见解的人就立下了这五种诽谤。这五种诽谤的名目是：一、增益谤，二、损减谤，三、相违谤，四、戏论谤，五、愚废谤。像这样，这五种诽谤一一来说，第一种是说诸法是‘有’。
English
English version Exhaustive. Unobstructed eloquence in terms of names and meanings (unimpeded eloquence in understanding names and meanings). All Buddhas and Tathagatas teach according to circumstances, comprehensively explaining the nature and phenomena of things without doubt or obstruction. This is unobstructed eloquence in terms of names and laws (unimpeded eloquence in understanding names and laws). The Tathagata's teachings are rich and diverse in words and meanings. Speaking with one voice, all beings can understand according to their kind. Skillful and convenient, with abundant wisdom, never weary. The words and meanings set forth are without impediment. This is called explanation. The Dharma spoken is without obstruction or stagnation, and is called unobstructed (etc.). What are the different paths of emptiness and existence, and where do the differences between breadth and brevity lie? Use this as a metaphor: recording a thousand things, ten thousand things, ultimately leads to the same principle. What does '曷 (hé)' mean? '辙 (zhé)' means road. The names of emptiness and existence are secret intentions and expedient sayings. If one explores the ultimate truth, existence and emptiness are not different. 'Existence' refers to accumulation and reality, discussed in terms of attachment and prejudice. 'Emptiness' means that things are formed by conditioned arising, and the enlightened nature is not truly existent. Understanding this, one knows that delusion and enlightenment are inherently different, but from the source, emptiness and existence are not distinct. The sayings of breadth and brevity are also not different in reality. If one is enlightened, four sentences are sufficient, and there is no need to seek more, which is 'brevity'. If one is deluded, even if one reads ten thousand volumes of mantras, it is still like falling into delusion, which is 'breadth'. It is only that beings have differences in their capacity for dullness and sharpness, but breadth and brevity are not different in reality. What does '奚 (xī)' mean? (etc.). Investigating the root will surely taste the same as hundreds of rivers flowing into the sea; dwelling on the end will compete and flow into the five slanders. Speaking of 'investigating the root', investigation means exhausting. The root means the essence, which is beyond names and forms, and is the truth. Speaking from the perspective of understanding and integration, if one grasps the root, one will know that all rivers return to the same sea. Tasting a drop of water from the great sea, one knows that the taste of all rivers is the same. Speaking of 'dwelling on the end', dwelling is due to delusion. The end refers to those who are attached to the teachings of emptiness and existence, discussed in terms of their partiality. The 'Two Nights Sutra' says: 'On a certain night, I attained perfect enlightenment; on a certain night, I entered Parinirvana. In between these two nights, I said nothing at all.' Not speaking is what the Buddha said. If one says that the Tathagata has said something, that is slandering the Buddha, because one cannot understand the meaning of what I said. Knowing that the Dharma of the essence is beyond words, it is what the mind wants to think but cannot think, what the mouth wants to say but cannot say, it cannot be known by wisdom, it cannot be recognized by consciousness. Those with biased views then establish these five slanders. The names of these five slanders are: first, the slander of addition; second, the slander of subtraction; third, the slander of contradiction; fourth, the slander of frivolousness; fifth, the slander of foolish abandonment. Like this, these five slanders are explained one by one. The first is saying that all dharmas are 'existent'. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
法本不有。言有者增益谤。法性本空。何得言有。二者言诸法无。本法不无。言无者损减谤。依他性有。何得言无。三亦有亦无。本法离有离无。相违谤。空有并与理将违越。四者非有非无。本法无来不有。即今不无。是戏论谤。非有者言空。非无云有。空有不定。明知戏论。又第一义中无有少法可得。若立一法起名相者。皆成戏论。五非以有以无。本法无有文字语言。若言法无名字。是愚痴谤。翻第四成第五。四言非空者是有。有非是有。言非有者是空。无非是无。有非是有。还成无义。无非是无。却成有义。若如是者。明知迷愚实非智者。 是以小乘漂于有有部执繁兴胜义溺于空空诤论纷起 言是以小乘漂于有有者。漂者浮也。人我法我二俱定有。故言二有 言胜义溺于空空者。溺者沈也。上之二义悉皆是空。故名二空。前宗执有。后者滞空。空有相违诤论竞起。言人我者。五蕴假和合处横计有人。离我我所人无我矣。言法我者。执因缘法实为起生皆有自性。故称为我。因缘生法悉皆虚妄。本自不生体无动摇。法无我矣。 尚驱妄境未越昏衢徒向真风虚沾法雨 言尚驱妄境者。沈空住有总名妄境 未越昏衢者。闇道也。若也起上僻见。未越于沈轮 言徒向真风者。偏执者徒劳趣向于真宗 风者化也。 现代汉语译本 法本非有。若说‘有’，便是增益诽谤。法性本为空，怎么能说‘有’呢？ 第二种说法是诸法皆‘无’。但本法并非‘无’，若说‘无’，便是损减诽谤。依他性是存在的，怎么能说‘无’呢？ 第三种说法是‘亦有亦无’。但本法离于‘有’和‘无’，这种说法是互相矛盾的诽谤，‘空’和‘有’并存与真理相违背。 第四种说法是‘非有非无’。但本法无来无去，并非‘有’，即当下也并非‘无’，这是一种戏论诽谤。说‘非有’就是说‘空’，说‘非无’就是说‘有’，‘空’和‘有’不定，明显是戏论。而且在第一义谛中，没有丝毫法可以获得，如果立一个法，起一个名相，就都成了戏论。 第五种说法是‘非以有以无’。但本法没有文字语言，如果说法没有名字，就是愚痴诽谤，这与第四种说法相反，成了第五种。 第四种说法说‘非空’，那就是‘有’，但‘有’并非真‘有’。说‘非有’，那就是‘空’，但‘无’并非真‘无’。‘有’并非真‘有’，最终还是成了‘无’义。‘无’并非真‘无’，却成了‘有’义。如果这样，明显是迷惑愚痴，实在不是智者。 因此，小乘佛教沉溺于‘有’，有部（Sarvastivada）的执着繁荣兴盛；胜义谛沉溺于‘空’，‘空’的争论纷纷兴起。 说小乘佛教沉溺于‘有’，‘有’是指什么呢？沉溺是指浮于表面。人我和法我两种都认为是真实存在的，所以说是‘二有’。 说胜义谛沉溺于‘空’，‘空’是指什么呢？沉溺是指沉没其中。上面说的两种意义都认为是‘空’，所以称为‘二空’。之前的宗派执着于‘有’，后来的宗派滞留于‘空’，‘空’和‘有’相互违背，争论不断。 说‘人我’，是指五蕴假合之处，横生计较，认为有人存在。离开了我以及我所拥有的，人就没有我了。说‘法我’，是指执着因缘法真实生起，都具有自性，所以称为‘我’。因缘生法都是虚妄的，本来不生，本体没有动摇，法就没有我了。 还在追逐虚妄的境界，没有超越昏暗的道路，只是徒劳地趋向真理之风，虚假地沾染佛法的甘露。 说还在追逐虚妄的境界，是指沉溺于‘空’或执着于‘有’，总称为虚妄的境界。 没有超越昏暗的道路，是指没有超越黑暗的道路。如果产生上述偏颇的见解，就没有超越沉沦的轮回。 说只是徒劳地趋向真理之风，是指偏执的人徒劳地趋向于真正的宗义。 ‘风’是指教化。
English
English version The Dharma is fundamentally non-existent. To say it ‘exists’ is an exaggeration and slander. The nature of Dharma is fundamentally empty; how can one say it ‘exists’? The second view is that all Dharmas are ‘non-existent.’ But the fundamental Dharma is not ‘non-existent.’ To say it is ‘non-existent’ is a diminishing slander. Dependent origination exists; how can one say it is ‘non-existent’? The third view is ‘both existent and non-existent.’ But the fundamental Dharma is apart from ‘existence’ and ‘non-existence.’ This view is a contradictory slander; the coexistence of ‘emptiness’ and ‘existence’ contradicts the truth. The fourth view is ‘neither existent nor non-existent.’ But the fundamental Dharma neither comes nor goes, is not ‘existent,’ and is not ‘non-existent’ in the present moment. This is a playful slander. To say ‘not existent’ is to say ‘empty,’ and to say ‘not non-existent’ is to say ‘existent.’ ‘Emptiness’ and ‘existence’ are uncertain, clearly a playful argument. Moreover, in the ultimate truth, there is not a single Dharma to be obtained. If one establishes a Dharma and gives it a name, it all becomes a playful argument. The fifth view is ‘not by existence, not by non-existence.’ But the fundamental Dharma has no written language. To say that the Dharma has no name is a foolish slander, reversing the fourth view into the fifth. The fourth view says ‘not empty,’ which is ‘existent,’ but ‘existence’ is not truly ‘existent.’ To say ‘not existent’ is ‘empty,’ but ‘non-existence’ is not truly ‘non-existent.’ ‘Existence’ is not truly ‘existent,’ ultimately becoming meaningless. ‘Non-existence’ is not truly ‘non-existent,’ but becomes ‘existent.’ If this is the case, it is clearly delusion and foolishness, certainly not wisdom. Therefore, the Hinayana (Small Vehicle) is adrift in ‘existence,’ with the Sarvastivada (有部) school’s attachment flourishing; the ultimate truth is drowned in ‘emptiness,’ with disputes about ‘emptiness’ arising. To say the Hinayana is adrift in ‘existence,’ what does ‘existence’ refer to? Adrift means floating on the surface. Both the personal self (人我, pudgala-atma) and the Dharma self (法我, dharma-atma) are considered truly existent, hence ‘two existences.’ To say the ultimate truth is drowned in ‘emptiness,’ what does ‘emptiness’ refer to? Drowned means submerged within. The two meanings mentioned above are considered ‘empty,’ hence ‘two emptinesses.’ The previous school clings to ‘existence,’ the latter school is stuck in ‘emptiness.’ ‘Emptiness’ and ‘existence’ contradict each other, leading to constant disputes. To say ‘personal self,’ it refers to the aggregation of the five skandhas (五蕴, pañca-skandha), from which one falsely calculates and believes that a person exists. Apart from the self and what belongs to the self, there is no personal self. To say ‘Dharma self,’ it refers to the attachment to conditioned Dharmas as truly arising and possessing self-nature, hence called ‘self.’ Conditioned Dharmas are all illusory, fundamentally unarisen, and their essence is unwavering; thus, there is no Dharma self. Still chasing after illusory realms, not yet transcending the dark path, merely turning towards the wind of truth in vain, falsely receiving the rain of Dharma. To say still chasing after illusory realms, it refers to being drowned in ‘emptiness’ or clinging to ‘existence,’ collectively called illusory realms. Not yet transcending the dark path means not transcending the path of darkness. If one develops the aforementioned biased views, one has not transcended the cycle of suffering. To say merely turning towards the wind of truth in vain, it refers to those who are biased turning towards the true doctrine in vain. ‘Wind’ refers to transformation (教化, teachings). --------------------------------------------------------------------------------