576. Yepi maññanti ‘‘idappaccayānaṃ bhāvo idappaccayatā, bhāvo ca nāma yo ākāro avijjādīnaṃ saṅkhārādipātubhāve hetu, so. Tasmiñca saṅkhāravikāre paṭiccasamuppādasaññā’’ti, tesaṃ taṃ na yujjati.
又有人想道：「此缘的状态为此缘性。这状态便是无明等的行相，是行等现前之因。而此状态在于行的变化中即名缘起」。他这种说法也是不合理的！
Ñ(XVII,14): And those are wrong who imagine that specific conditionality (idappaccayatā) is the specific conditions' [abstract] essence—what is called 'abstract essence' being a [particular] mode in ignorance, etc., that acts as cause in the manifestation of formations, etc.—and that the term 'dependent origination' is used for an alteration in formations when there is that [particular mode in the way of occurrence of ignorance].
Kasmā?
何以故？
Ñ: Why are they wrong?
Avijjādīnaṃ hetuvacanato.
因为已说无明为因之故。
Ñ: Because it is ignorance, etc., themselves that are called causes.
Bhagavatā hi ‘‘tasmātiha, ānanda, eseva hetu, etaṃ nidānaṃ, esa samudayo, esa paccayo jarāmaraṇassa yadidaṃ jāti…pe… saṅkhārānaṃ, yadidaṃ avijjā’’ti (dī. ni. 2.98 ādayo) evaṃ avijjādayova hetūti vuttā, na tesaṃ vikāro.
即如世尊说：「是故阿难，只有生是老死的因、是它的因缘、是它的集、是它的缘……乃至……只有无明是行的……缘」。如是佛陀只说无明等是因、不是说它们的变化（是因）。
Ñ: For in the following passage it is ignorance, etc., themselves, not their alteration, that are called the causes [of these states]: 'Therefore, Ānanda, just this is the cause, this is the source, this is the origin, this is the condition, for ageing-and-death, that is to say, birth … for formations, that is to say, (ignorance)' (D.ii,57-63—the last clause is not in the D. text).
Tasmā ‘‘paṭiccasamuppādoti paccayadhammā veditabbā’’ti iti yaṃ taṃ vuttaṃ, taṃ sammā vuttanti veditabbaṃ.
是故当知缘起便是缘的法，唯此说为正说。
Ñ: Therefore it is the actual states themselves as conditions that should be understood as 'dependent origination'. So what was said above (§4) can be understood as rightly said.
No comments:
Post a Comment