English
English version Only sound exists. The nature of sound is that it arises from conditions and is ultimately empty and still. How can good and evil arise within it? This passage has two parts. The first introduces the object of observation. The second part, '若遇已下' (if encountering the following), is about cultivating observation in response to the object, clearly explaining the need to relinquish attachments. In the first part, there is first a repetition, then an exhortation, and finally an explanation. In the exhortation, two of the 'Eight Winds' (利、衰、毁、誉、称、讥、苦、乐 - gain, loss, disgrace, honor, praise, ridicule, sorrow, joy) are briefly mentioned, representing adverse and favorable conditions. Among the adverse conditions, there are two aspects: first, disparagement, slander, and humiliation, along with criticism and rebuke of the virtuous, with even minor faults being severely reprimanded. The following explains the favorable, slight kindnesses, with excessive praise being called commendation. These are all unreal, like echoes in an empty valley. Sentient beings do not understand this principle, mistakenly believing them to be real. Since rational observation is absent, what is there to hate or rejoice over? The following is about cultivating observation in response to the object, divided into two parts. The first explains that when encountering an object, one should arouse contemplation, dismantling it and returning it to emptiness. Therefore, it is said '此音声者' (this sound), whether it is large or small, ultimately nothing is obtained. Therefore, the *Mahaprajnaparamita Sastra* says: 'The wind is called Udāna (气息 - breath), touching the navel and rising upwards. This wind touches seven places: the crown of the head, the gums, the teeth, the lips, the tongue, the throat, and the chest. Language arises from these places. Ordinary people do not understand this principle, or they become attached to it and generate anger and delusion.' If nothing is obtained, the second part formally exhorts to relinquish attachments. Since sound is inherently empty, and disparagement and praise are unreal, why should one falsely generate feelings of anger and joy? The following second part is about the benefits of contemplation, divided into three parts. First is the Dharma, then a metaphor, and finally a conclusion. In the first part, the above matter is first repeated, and cultivating observation can obtain excellent results, so it is said '作是观已乃至当得菩提' (after contemplating in this way, one should attain Bodhi). '阿' (A) means 'no', '耨多罗' (Anuttara) means 'supreme', '三称正' (three times called right), '藐' (Samyak) means 'true', also called '正' (right), '菩提' (Bodhi) means 'the Way', which is the supreme Bodhi, the right and true Way. '何以故下' (why is that), the following is the explanation. It is precisely because the nature of all dharmas is empty, and emptiness and penetration are called 'the Way', and contemplating sound is also like this, why can't one attain enlightenment? The following explains the metaphor and the conclusion in two parts. 才相飞空，睡乃腾虚，菩提久现，则功不唐捐 (Talent flies in the sky, sleep soars in the void, Bodhi appears for a long time, then the effort is not in vain). Therefore, it is said that the Bodhisattva attains enlightenment by contemplating the emptiness of clothing. From below begins the second contemplation of the emptiness of the realms. The inner six senses (眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、意 - eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind), the outer six objects (色、声、香、味、触、法 - form, sound, smell, taste, touch, dharma), and the intermediate six consciousnesses (眼识、耳识、鼻识、舌识、身识、意识 - eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, mind-consciousness) combine to form the eighteen realms. This passage is divided into three parts. The first explains the aversion to and departure from the clothing of birth and death, and the need to dwell high in the principle of emptiness, exhorting to cultivate observation, thereby cutting off various delusions. The second part, '譬如阳炎已下' (like a mirage below), explains that the principle is obscure. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
难彰。借喻为况。第三诸有智者已下。结观修行。明观所成益。前中有三。初举果劝行其因。第二或有众生已下。明观修意。第三眼不自见已下。正明修观广辩空义。前中复三。初举果劝修。正明菩提体状。第二宝明请问。第三佛言下答也。问曰。三事本空非今始空。体即菩提。无劳别证。何故乃言欲得菩提。当观三处也。释言。菩提体性实无隐显。但以无明所覆有而不觉。安须修观始方克证譬如虚空证性虽净然为烟云尘雾之所隐蔽。不可以空体性净。即文彰不除而自现也。文言于三处中等者。此三事无体。更相依持。离有离无。不生不灭。名为不实。不实性空称为解脱也。劝修意中教如实观者。眼等虚妄诳或。犯夫无其性也。以无生为体故。今劝观舍虚会实。色心妄法更不现前。贪嗔等或自此衰丧。故智论言。内外十二入皆是魔网。虚诳不实。于此中生六种识。亦是魔网。虚诳不实。何者是实唯有不二之法。谓无眼无色乃至无意无法等。是名为实也。下正观中但明眼色与心。余者例令文别有三。初约无性辨空空。就因缘以释。第三善男子应作是念已下。据不住明空旨。言空者。空无有无一切分别悉不相应也。前中初略述计情。第二申理正破。但执见不同。泛说有三。初一是毗昙八计。谓净色为眼。非实天眼所见。是 不障碍有对色。识住眼中以瞻诸尘。名自分眼见色。第二成实人计。识在眼门。分别青黄。即以识为见。第三大乘学者。随文取义立。根尘和合方能见色。良由未达深旨。各随已执计法有性并云能见也。言正破者。但根尘等法并依藏识。一心因缘幻起意无自体。虽复为能见也。今言眼不自见者。正是破辞。若谓眼有见性则未曾不见。开即睹外青黄赤白可能见。自体既不自见。觉有见尘立见。故论言。是眼则不能自见其己体。若不能自见何能见余物。又若不见自体。应自体非眼。然不见自体。而是眼者此则见非是眼。云何名眼能见。若尔应有离见之眼离眼之见也。彼云。眼是不可见有对色。故不自见者。若尔眼体既不为他所见。云何能见他。如百论言。四大非现见。云何生现见。又眼不自见而能见他者。亦应半见半非见。半见可名眼。半不见应非眼。次破识见类。前可知故言眼不自见。既不自见。故知无性空也。色不自名者。色体无心不自言。色对眼彰自。假吊色名。故知无性也。心无形质者。心若有体应有所在。若言在内不应缘境方生。定居其外则身内无心。应同木石。内外推求莫知其所岂有形质也。故起信论言。心无形求十方求之终不可得。下第三总结。眼色无性则无所不在。故得眼住于内。色常处外。心无形质。 现代汉语译本 不障碍有对色（可以阻碍有形之物）。识（意识）停留在眼中以观察各种尘境（色、声、香、味、触）。这被称为‘自分眼见色’，即眼睛自己分辨并看到颜色。第二种是成实宗人的观点，他们认为识（意识）在眼门（眼睛的入口），分别青黄等颜色，因此认为识就是能见的。第三种是大乘学者的观点，他们根据字面意思认为根（感觉器官）和尘（感觉对象）结合才能见色。这些都是因为没有理解深刻的道理，各自根据自己的执着认为法（事物）有自性，并且认为自己能够看见。 所谓‘正破’，是指根、尘等法都依赖于藏识（阿赖耶识），由一心因缘幻化而生，没有自体。虽然可以作为能见的条件，但现在说‘眼不自见’，正是为了破除这种观点。如果认为眼睛有见性，那么它应该无时无刻不在见，睁开眼睛就应该能看到外面的青黄赤白。但眼睛的自体都不能自己看见自己，却认为有能见之尘，从而建立‘见’的概念。所以《论》中说：‘眼睛不能自己看见自己的本体。’如果不能自己看见自己，又怎么能看见其他事物呢？而且，如果看不见自己的本体，那么自己的本体就应该不是眼睛。然而，看不见自己的本体，却又是眼睛，这说明见不是眼睛。如果见不是眼睛，又怎么能说眼睛能见呢？如果这样说，就应该有离开见的眼睛，以及离开眼睛的见。’ 他们说：‘眼睛是不可见的有对色，所以不能自己看见自己。’如果这样，眼睛的本体既然不能被其他事物看见，又怎么能看见其他事物呢？就像《百论》中说的：‘四大（地、水、火、风）不是直接可见的，怎么能产生直接的见呢？’而且，眼睛不能自己看见自己，却能看见其他事物，那么也应该一半看见，一半不看见。一半看见可以称为眼睛，一半不看见应该不是眼睛。 接下来破斥识见的观点，因为前面的内容已经可以推知，所以说眼睛不能自己看见自己。既然不能自己看见自己，就知道它是无自性、空性的。‘色不自名’，意思是色体没有心识，不能自己说出‘我是色’。色需要对着眼睛才能显现，自己假借色名，所以知道它是无自性的。‘心无形质’，意思是心如果有实体，就应该有所在之处。如果说心在身体内部，就不应该要缘着外境才能产生。如果心固定在身体外部，那么身体内部就没有心，应该和木头石头一样。在内外推求，都不知道心在哪里，又怎么会有形质呢？所以《起信论》中说：‘心没有形状，在十方寻求也终究不可得。’ 下面第三部分是总结。眼睛和色都没有自性，所以无所不在。因此，眼睛可以停留在内部，色常常处在外部，心没有形质。
English
English version It does not obstruct tangible forms. Consciousness (识, *shì*) dwells in the eye to perceive various dusts (尘, *chén*) [sense objects: forms, sounds, smells, tastes, and tactile objects]. This is called 'self-distinguishing eye seeing form' (自分眼见色, *zì fēn yǎn jiàn sè*), meaning the eye itself distinguishes and sees colors. The second view is that of the 成实宗 (Chéngshí Zōng) [Tattvasiddhi School] people, who believe that consciousness (识, *shì*) is at the eye-gate (the entrance of the eye), distinguishing between blue and yellow, and therefore consider consciousness to be what sees. The third view is that of Mahayana scholars, who, according to the literal meaning, believe that the root (根, *gēn*) [sense organ] and the dust (尘, *chén*) [sense object] must combine to see form. These are all because they have not understood the profound truth, and each according to their own attachment believes that dharmas (法, *fǎ*) [things, phenomena] have self-nature, and believe that they can see. The so-called 'correct refutation' (正破, *zhèng pò*) refers to the fact that roots, dusts, and other dharmas all rely on the 藏识 (zàngshì) [Ālaya-consciousness], arising from the illusory transformation of one mind's causes and conditions, without self-nature. Although it can serve as a condition for seeing, now saying 'the eye does not see itself' (眼不自见, *yǎn bù zì jiàn*) is precisely to refute this view. If it is believed that the eye has a seeing nature, then it should be seeing at all times, and opening the eyes should be able to see the blue, yellow, red, and white outside. But the eye's own substance cannot see itself, yet it is believed that there is seeing-dust, thereby establishing the concept of 'seeing'. Therefore, the *Treatise* says: 'The eye cannot see its own substance.' If it cannot see itself, how can it see other things? Moreover, if it cannot see its own substance, then its own substance should not be the eye. However, not seeing its own substance, yet being the eye, this shows that seeing is not the eye. If seeing is not the eye, how can it be said that the eye can see? If this is the case, there should be an eye apart from seeing, and seeing apart from the eye.' They say: 'The eye is an invisible tangible form, so it cannot see itself.' If so, since the eye's substance cannot be seen by other things, how can it see other things? Just as the *Hundred Treatises* says: 'The four great elements (四大, *sì dà*) [earth, water, fire, wind] are not directly visible, how can direct seeing arise?' Moreover, the eye cannot see itself, yet it can see other things, then it should also see half and not see half. Seeing half can be called the eye, not seeing half should not be the eye. Next, refute the view of consciousness-seeing, because the previous content can already be inferred, so it is said that the eye cannot see itself. Since it cannot see itself, it is known that it is without self-nature, empty (空, *kōng*). 'Form does not name itself' (色不自名, *sè bù zì míng*), meaning the substance of form has no consciousness, and cannot say 'I am form'. Form needs to be facing the eye to manifest, borrowing the name of form, so it is known that it is without self-nature. 'The mind has no shape or substance' (心无形质, *xīn wú xíng zhì*), meaning if the mind has substance, it should have a place to be. If it is said that the mind is inside the body, it should not need to rely on external objects to arise. If the mind is fixed outside the body, then there is no mind inside the body, it should be the same as wood and stone. Seeking inside and outside, one does not know where the mind is, how can it have shape or substance? Therefore, the *Awakening of Faith Treatise* says: 'The mind has no shape, seeking in the ten directions, it is ultimately unattainable.' The third part below is a summary. The eye and form have no self-nature, so they are omnipresent. Therefore, the eye can dwell inside, form is often outside, and the mind has no shape or substance. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------