翻刻
【二十頁上】
爲＿レ惑。若以名名等者。識＿二法但名＿一爲＿レ解。此亦無＿レ失。以下
非住《割書：□【(国構えに考)】以下非住之四｜字疑衍或寫誤乎》今準＿二新本＿一云。世諦故至＿二見亦名見＿一
爲＿二世諦三假義＿一。生性實故者。如＿二智論云＿一。世界悉檀故實。
乃至第一義悉檀故實。六十二見爲＿二世諦＿一者。如＿二 下文云＿一。
若有若無。但生＿二衆生憶念＿一名爲＿二世諦＿一。《割書：云云｜》 無體隨情假是
名假攝歟。今文意云。上從＿二諸境界＿一 下至＿二外人所計＿一。若一
往論假相即非＿レ無。若決定執＿二實性＿一即非＿レ有。若以名名等
者。若著＿二名相＿一不＿レ見＿二實性＿一。非非見者。非＿二非執見＿一也。又
云。六十二見者。略標＿二邪見＿一。大王若以下廣明也。七賢者。
《割書：如＿レ前｜》八聖者。測云。四向四果。私云。經一切生以下文正見
邪見相濫難＿レ辨。學者細思。
經。白佛言般若乃至中說
第二觀照般若。先問後答。
經。白佛言般若波羅蜜有法非非法摩訶衍云何照
新云。諸法實性。清淨平等。非有非無。智云何照。私云。
白佛言乃至云何照￣トハ 問。液云。有法非非法者。無＿二法不＿一＿レ空
也。實相無相。照何所＿レ照。名＿二大乘觀照＿一耶。私加云。今準＿二
【二十頁下】
新本＿一。有法者諸法也。非非法者非有非無也。《割書：藏測等意｜同＿レ之》問
意云。依＿二般若理＿一。諸法實性非＿レ有非＿レ無。都不可得。欲＿レ知＿二
大乘觀照之智＿一。云何照耶。《割書：一巻意｜似＿レ之》
經。大王摩訶衍見非非法法若非非法是名非非法空法性
空色受想行識空十二入空十八界空六大法空四諦《割書：□【国構えに考】諦｜下一》
《割書：本有｜空字》十二緣空是法即生即住即滅即有即空乃至中說
液云。佛答文五。一略答＿二所照二＿一。法性空下廣明＿二境空＿一。《割書：私云。｜準＿レ》
《割書：新廣述＿二非非法空｜義＿一也。測同＿レ之。》三般若下境智合辨。四善男子若菩薩下
棟＿二邪正＿一。五即是下結＿二異名＿一。私云。可＿レ云＿三即能運下辨＿二異
名＿一歟。測并一卷意似＿レ之。
經。大王摩訶衍見非非法法若非非法是名非非法空
新云。智照實性非有非無。液云。略答＿二所照＿一。法若等者。一
卷云。今明＿二所見唯空＿一。空何所＿レ照即以＿二無照＿一而照。測云。謂
所緣法。若非非法者。於＿二諸法中＿一名＿二非非法空＿一。液云。法本
無。法故曰＿二非非＿一。法若非非假名＿二空法＿一。豈可＿三聞＿レ空而生＿二
取著＿一耶。藏云。非非法者非有非無也。法若是有可＿二如＿レ有
而知＿一。法若是無可＿二如＿レ無而照＿一。以＿二法非有非無＿一故。照如＿二
【二十一頁上】
虛空＿一矣。私云。經若字意未＿レ明。今謂若猶＿二若此＿一見＿二論語
註＿一。意云。摩訶衍見＿二非非法＿一。法若＿レ此非非法是名＿二非非法
空＿一也。
經。法性空乃至一切法亦如是
新云。智照實性。非有非無。所以者何。法性空故。是即色
受想行識。十二處十八界七大六界十二因緣二諦四諦。
一切皆空。是諸法等。即生即滅。即有即空。刹那刹那。亦
復如是。何以故。一念中有九十刹那。一刹那經九百生
滅。諸有爲法悉皆空故。液云。廣明＿二境空＿一。文三。一法性空
標＿二性空＿一。二色受下列＿二空法＿一。三是法下釋＿二空所以＿一。了＿二此妄
想分別性＿一。即無性名＿二性空＿一。一卷云。初一句總明＿二法性皆
空＿一。後例擧＿二 六科＿一。私云。以＿二法性空＿一爲＿二總標句＿一。善順＿二新本＿一。
亦順＿二 下是法即生等文＿一。不＿レ可＿レ言＿二法性是生滅法＿一。故學者
細思。測云。非非法空歷＿二法差別＿一。便成＿二 七空＿一。一法性空者。
諸《割書：□【国構えに考】諸下疑｜脱法字》實性本性自空。不＿レ由＿二智力＿一名＿二法性空＿一。二五
蘊。三十二處。四十八界。五六大謂＿二 四大空識＿一。六四諦。
七十二緣。《割書：私云。若依＿二此釋＿一是法｜即生文可＿レ和＿二會之＿一》是法即生乃至色一切法亦
【二十一頁下】
如是者。液云。釋＿レ所＿二以空＿一也。文三。一標前蘊界入是有
爲法。二何以故等者徵釋也。三乃至色等者類＿二破諸法＿一
也。色等從＿レ緣生滅。即無。法有爲法無性焉有＿二無爲＿一哉。蘊
界若然諦緣自遣也。測云。是法下就＿レ識釋＿レ空。乃至下類＿二
釋四蘊及一切法＿一。藏云。是法即生者牒＿二 上色等諸法＿一。《割書：云云 ｜》
刹那亦如是下就＿レ心辨＿レ空。《割書：云云 ｜》何以故下釋＿三 上色心所＿二以
空＿一也。九十刹那爲一念乃至一切法亦如是。上廣辨＿二其
色＿一。略辨＿二其心＿一。今亦就＿レ內廣明＿二其心＿一。略釋＿二其色空＿一。聖人
善巧廣略互擧。乃至一切法亦如是結＿二 上《割書：□【国構えに考】上下疏｜有色字》心法＿一
《割書：□【国構えに考】法疏｜作空》也。私云。此一段經文諸師釋不＿レ明。今偸案云。此以＿二
有爲無常＿一顯＿二空義＿一也。是法即生等者。明＿二 一期無常＿一也。刹
那等者。明＿二刹那無常＿一也。乃至色一切法等。例＿二 上所＿レ列
法＿一顯＿二諸餘法＿一也。然色言不＿レ明。藏師不＿レ牒＿二此《割書：□【国構えに考】此恐｜色字》字＿一
異本歟。諸師所＿レ牒多有＿二此《割書：□【国構えに考】此恐｜色字》字＿一。誠《割書：□【国構えに考】誠｜恐試》作＿二 一釋＿一。若
準＿二大般若意＿一。具足應＿レ言＿二法性空故色受想行識空乃至
色空故受想行識空等＿一也。歷＿二 一切法＿一應＿二如＿レ是說＿一。今略
明＿レ之故云＿レ爾歟。問。如＿二 上所＿一＿レ列者。法性次有＿レ色。今略＿二
現代語訳
【二十頁上】
惑いとなす。「若以名名」等については、法はただ名のみであることを識って解とする。これも失がない。以下「非住」（この四字は衍字か写し誤りかと疑う）今、新本に準じて云う。「世諦故」から「見亦名見」までは世諦三假の義とする。「生性実故」については、智論に云うが如く、世界悉檀の故に実、乃至第一義悉檀の故に実である。六十二見が世諦であるとは、下文に云うが如く、「若有若無、但だ衆生の憶念を生ずるを名づけて世諦とす」である。体が無く情に随う仮であるから、これは名仮摂であろうか。今の文意では、上は諸境界から下は外人の所計に至るまで、若し一往して仮相を論ずれば即ち無に非ず、若し決定して実性を執すれば即ち有に非ず。「若以名名」等については、若し名相に著すれば実性を見ず、「非非見」とは「非執見に非ず」ということである。また云う、六十二見とは略して邪見を標し、「大王若以」以下は広く明かすのである。七賢者は前の如く、八聖者について、測師は云う、四向四果である。私云う、経の「一切生」以下の文は、正見と邪見が相濫して弁じ難い。学者は細かく思うべきである。
経。仏に白して言う。般若乃至中に説く。
第二は観照般若である。先ず問い、後に答える。
経。仏に白して言う。般若波羅蜜は有法非非法摩訶衍なり。云何が照らすや。
新訳では「諸法実性、清浄平等、非有非無、智云何が照らすや」とある。私云う、「仏に白して言う」乃至「云何が照らすや」までは問いである。液師は云う、「有法非非法」とは、法として空でないものは無いということである。実相は無相である。何を照らすところがあろうか。大乗観照と名づけるのか。私が加えて云う、今新本に準ずる。
【二十頁下】
新本では、「有法」とは諸法であり、「非非法」とは非有非無である。蔵師・測師等の意も同じである。問いの意では、般若理に依れば、諸法実性は有に非ず無に非ず、都て得べからず。大乗観照の智を知らんと欲す、云何が照らすや、ということである。一巻の意もこれに似ている。
経。大王、摩訶衍は非非法を見る。法若し非非法なれば、是れを非非法空と名づく。法性空、色受想行識空、十二入空、十八界空、六大法空、四諦空、十二縁空、是の法は即生即住即滅即有即空なり。乃至中に説く。
液師は云う、仏の答えの文に五つある。一は略して所照の二を答え、「法性空」以下は広く境空を明かす。私云う、新に準じて広く非非法空の義を述べるのである。測師も同じである。三は「般若」以下で境智を合わせて弁じ、四は「善男子若菩薩」以下で邪正を棟げ、五は「即是」以下で異名を結ぶ。私云う、「即能運」以下で異名を弁ずると云うべきか。測師並びに一巻の意もこれに似ている。
経。大王、摩訶衍は非非法を見る。法若し非非法なれば、是れを非非法空と名づく。
新訳では「智は実性非有非無を照らす」とある。液師は云う、略して所照を答える。「法若」等について、一巻では「今、見る所は唯だ空なることを明かす。空は何を照らすところがあろうか。即ち無照を以て照らす」と云う。測師は云う、所縁の法を謂う。「若非非法」とは、諸法中において「非非法空」と名づける。液師は云う、法は本無く法であるから「非非」と曰う。法若し非非なれば仮に「空法」と名づく。どうして空を聞いて取著を生ずることがあろうか。蔵師は云う、「非非法」とは非有非無である。法若し是れ有なれば有の如くして知るべく、法若し是れ無なれば無の如くして照らすべきである。法は非有非無を以ての故に、照らすこと
【二十一頁上】
虚空の如くである。私云う、経の「若」字の意は未だ明らかでない。今謂うに、「若」は猶「若此」のようで、論語註に見える。意では、摩訶衍は非非法を見る。法若しこの非非法なれば、是れを非非法空と名づけるのである。
経。法性空、乃至一切法も亦た是の如し。
新訳では「智は実性を照らす。非有非無なり。所以は何ぞや。法性空の故なり。是れ即ち色受想行識、十二処十八界七大六界十二因縁二諦四諦、一切皆空なり。是の諸法等は、即生即滅、即有即空、刹那刹那、亦復是の如し。何を以ての故に、一念中に九十刹那あり。一刹那に九百生滅を経る。諸の有為法悉く皆空の故なり」とある。液師は云う、広く境空を明かす。文に三つあり、一は「法性空」で性空を標し、二は「色受」以下で空法を列し、三は「是法」以下で空の所以を釈す。この妄想分別性を了すれば、即ち無性で性空と名づける。一巻では「初めの一句は総じて法性皆空を明かし、後に六科を例挙する」と云う。私云う、法性空を以て総標句とするのは、善く新本に順じ、また下の「是法即生」等の文にも順ずる。法性は是れ生滅法であると言うべからず。故に学者は細かく思うべきである。測師は云う、非非法空は法差別に歴して、便ち七空を成ず。一は法性空で、諸実性本性自空、智力に由らず法性空と名づく。二は五蘊、三は十二処、四は十八界、五は六大で四大空識を謂い、六は四諦、七は十二縁である。私云う、この釈に依れば「是法即生」の文は和会すべきである。「是法即生」乃至「色一切法亦
【二十一頁下】
是の如し」について、液師は云う、空である所以を釈す。文に三つあり、一は前の蘊界入は是れ有為法であることを標し、二は「何以故」等は徴釈、三は「乃至色」等は諸法を類破するのである。色等は縁に従って生滅し、即ち無である。有為法に無性があるなら、どうして無為があろうか。蘊界が若し然らば、諦縁は自ら遣される。測師は云う、「是法」以下は識に就いて空を釈し、「乃至」以下は四蘊及び一切法を類釈する。蔵師は云う、「是法即生」は上の色等諸法を牒し、「刹那亦如是」以下は心に就いて空を弁ずる。「何以故」以下は上の色心が空である所以を釈す。「九十刹那為一念」乃至「一切法亦如是」まで、上では広くその色を弁じ、略してその心を弁じた。今も亦た内に就いて広くその心を明かし、略してその色空を釈す。聖人の善巧で広略互いに挙げる。「乃至一切法亦如是」は上の心法を結ぶのである。私云う、この一段の経文について諸師の釈は明でない。今、案ずるに、これは有為無常を以て空義を顕すのである。「是法即生」等は一期無常を明かし、「刹那」等は刹那無常を明かし、「乃至色一切法」等は上に列する所の法を例として諸の余法を顕すのである。然るに「色」の言は明でない。蔵師はこの字を牒さず、異本であろうか。諸師の牒する所には多くこの字がある。誠に一釈を作そう。若し大般若の意に準ずれば、具足して「法性空の故に色受想行識空、乃至色空の故に受想行識空等」と言うべきである。一切法に歴してこの如く説くべきである。今略して之を明かすので爾う云うのか。問う、上に列する所の如くは、法性の次に色がある。今略して
英語訳
[Page 20, Upper]
are led astray. Regarding "if using names to name," etc., recognizing that dharmas are merely names becomes understanding. This is also without fault. Below "non-abiding" (these four characters are suspected to be superfluous or copying errors). Now, following the new version: from "due to conventional truth" to "views also called seeing" represents the meaning of conventional truth and three provisional designations. Regarding "the nature of beings is real," as the Prajñāpāramitā Treatise says: real due to the mundane siddhānta, up to real due to the ultimate siddhānta. That the sixty-two views are conventional truth is as stated in the text below: "Whether existing or non-existing, merely generating sentient beings' recollection is called conventional truth." Having no substance and following emotions as provisional, this would be included in name-provisional designation. The meaning of the present text is: from above starting with "various object-realms" down to "what outsiders calculate" - if provisionally discussing provisional characteristics, they are not non-existent; if definitively clinging to real nature, they are not existent. Regarding "if using names to name," etc.: if one clings to name-characteristics, one does not see true nature. "Non-non-seeing" means "not non-attachment views." Also: the sixty-two views briefly indicate wrong views; from "Great King, if..." onward extensively clarifies this. Seven sages are as before; regarding eight saints, Master Wŏnch'ŭk says: the four directions and four fruits. I say: the sūtra text from "all beings" onward has correct views and wrong views intermixed, making discrimination difficult. Scholars should think carefully.
Sūtra: Addressing the Buddha: Prajñā... explained within.
The second is contemplative prajñā. First questioning, then answering.
Sūtra: Addressing the Buddha: Prajñāpāramitā has dharmas, non-non-dharmas, Mahāyāna - how does it illuminate?
The new version says: "The true nature of all dharmas is pure and equal, neither existing nor non-existing - how does wisdom illuminate?" I say: from "Addressing the Buddha" to "how does it illuminate" is the question. Master Dōeki says: "having dharmas, non-non-dharmas" means there are no dharmas that are not empty. True characteristic is without characteristic - what is there to illuminate? Is this called Mahāyāna contemplation? I add: now following the new version.
[Page 20, Lower]
In the new version, "having dharmas" refers to all dharmas, and "non-non-dharmas" refers to neither existing nor non-existing. Masters Jizang, Wŏnch'ŭk and others have the same understanding. The question's meaning is: depending on prajñā principle, the true nature of all dharmas is neither existing nor non-existing, completely unattainable. Wanting to know the wisdom of Mahāyāna contemplation - how does it illuminate? The first fascicle's meaning is similar.
Sūtra: Great King, Mahāyāna sees non-non-dharmas. If dharmas are non-non-dharmas, this is called non-non-dharma emptiness. Dharma-nature emptiness, form-sensation-perception-mental formations-consciousness emptiness, twelve bases emptiness, eighteen realms emptiness, six great dharmas emptiness, four truths emptiness, twelve conditions emptiness - these dharmas are immediately arising, immediately abiding, immediately ceasing, immediately existing, immediately empty. Explained within.
Master Dōeki says: The Buddha's answer has five parts. First, briefly answering the two illuminated objects; from "dharma-nature emptiness" onward extensively clarifying object-emptiness. I say: following the new version, extensively explaining the meaning of non-non-dharma emptiness. Master Wŏnch'ŭk agrees. Third, from "prajñā" onward jointly discriminating objects and wisdom; fourth, from "good son, if bodhisattvas" onward distinguishing wrong and correct; fifth, from "this is" onward concluding different names. I say: should it be called discriminating different names from "immediately capable of carrying" onward? Masters Wŏnch'ŭk and the first fascicle's meaning are similar.
Sūtra: Great King, Mahāyāna sees non-non-dharmas. If dharmas are non-non-dharmas, this is called non-non-dharma emptiness.
The new version says: "Wisdom illuminates true nature as neither existing nor non-existing." Master Dōeki says: briefly answering what is illuminated. Regarding "if dharmas," etc., the first fascicle says: "Now clarifying that what is seen is only emptiness. What does emptiness illuminate? Using non-illumination to illuminate." Master Wŏnch'ŭk says: referring to conditioned dharmas. "If non-non-dharmas" means among all dharmas it is called "non-non-dharma emptiness." Master Dōeki says: dharmas are originally without dharmas, hence called "non-non." If dharmas are non-non, provisionally called "empty dharmas." How could one hear emptiness and generate clinging? Master Jizang says: "non-non-dharmas" means neither existing nor non-existing. If dharmas exist, they can be known as existing; if dharmas are non-existent, they can be illuminated as non-existent. Because dharmas are neither existing nor non-existing, illumination is like
[Page 21, Upper]
empty space. I say: the meaning of the sūtra's character "if" is not yet clear. Now I consider "if" to be like "if this," as seen in Analects commentaries. The meaning is: Mahāyāna sees non-non-dharmas. If dharmas are such non-non-dharmas, this is called non-non-dharma emptiness.
Sūtra: Dharma-nature emptiness... all dharmas are likewise.
The new version says: "Wisdom illuminates true nature as neither existing nor non-existing. Why is this? Because dharma-nature is empty. This is precisely form-sensation-perception-mental formations-consciousness, twelve bases, eighteen realms, seven greats, six realms, twelve conditions, two truths, four truths - all are empty. These various dharmas are immediately arising, immediately ceasing, immediately existing, immediately empty, moment by moment, likewise. Why? In one thought there are ninety moments. One moment experiences nine hundred arisings and ceasings. All conditioned dharmas are completely empty." Master Dōeki says: extensively clarifying object-emptiness. The text has three parts: first, "dharma-nature emptiness" indicates nature-emptiness; second, from "form-sensation" onward lists empty dharmas; third, from "these dharmas" onward explains the reason for emptiness. Understanding this delusory discriminative nature is immediately naturelessness, called nature-emptiness. The first fascicle says: "The first sentence generally clarifies that dharma-nature is all empty; afterward exemplifying the six categories." I say: using "dharma-nature emptiness" as the general heading sentence well accords with the new version and also accords with the text below "these dharmas immediately arising," etc. One cannot say dharma-nature is arising-ceasing dharmas. Therefore scholars should think carefully. Master Wŏnch'ŭk says: non-non-dharma emptiness, going through dharma distinctions, forms seven emptinesses. First, dharma-nature emptiness - all true natures are originally naturally empty, not due to wisdom power, called dharma-nature emptiness. Second, five aggregates; third, twelve bases; fourth, eighteen realms; fifth, six greats referring to four elements, space, and consciousness; sixth, four truths; seventh, twelve conditions. I say: following this interpretation, the text "these dharmas immediately arising" can be harmonized. "These dharmas immediately arising" up to "form, all dharmas also
[Page 21, Lower]
likewise" - Master Dōeki says: explaining the reason for emptiness. The text has three parts: first, indicating that the previous aggregates-realms-bases are conditioned dharmas; second, "why?" etc. is questioning explanation; third, "up to form" etc. analogously refutes all dharmas. Form etc. arise and cease according to conditions, immediately non-existent. If conditioned dharmas have no nature, how could there be unconditioned? If aggregates and realms are thus, truths and conditions are naturally eliminated. Master Wŏnch'ŭk says: from "these dharmas" onward explains emptiness in terms of consciousness; from "up to" onward analogously explains the four aggregates and all dharmas. Master Jizang says: "these dharmas immediately arising" recapitulates the above form and other dharmas. From "moments likewise" onward discriminates emptiness in terms of mind. From "why?" onward explains the reason why the above form-mind are empty. "Ninety moments make one thought" up to "all dharmas are likewise" - above extensively discriminated form and briefly discriminated mind. Now also in terms of inner extensively clarifying mind and briefly explaining form-emptiness. The sage's skillful means alternately presents extensive and brief explanations. "Up to all dharmas likewise" concludes the above mind-dharmas. I say: regarding this passage of sūtra text, various masters' explanations are unclear. Now investigating: this uses conditioned impermanence to reveal the meaning of emptiness. "These dharmas immediately arising" etc. clarifies one-period impermanence. "Moments" etc. clarifies momentary impermanence. "Up to form, all dharmas" etc. uses the above-listed dharmas as examples to reveal various other dharmas. However, the word "form" is unclear. Master Jizang does not recapitulate this character - perhaps a different version? What various masters recapitulate often has this character. I sincerely attempt one interpretation. If following the Mahāprajñāpāramitā meaning, it should fully state: "Because dharma-nature is empty, form-sensation-perception-mental formations-consciousness are empty, up to because form is empty, sensation-perception-mental formations-consciousness are empty, etc." Going through all dharmas should be explained thus. Now briefly clarifying it, so speaking thus? Question: As listed above, form comes after dharma-nature. Now briefly