第十四 破邊執品
問曰：如果說所有緣起現像如同旋火輪，無有自性，那麼什麼叫做有自性呢？
1. 諸法若實有，應不依他成，既必依他成，定知非實有。
[索]若有任何法都不依靠他法，而是自己能單獨成立存在，這種法即可說為實有，然而這種法於任何處任何時都不會有。
(若有任何法，都不依他成，可說為實有，然彼皆非有。)
2. 非即色有瓶，非離色有瓶，非依瓶有色，非有瓶依色。
[索]瓶與色非一體，否則色即是瓶，也非異於瓶體有色相；非依於瓶子有色相，非有瓶子依於色相。
(非一色即瓶，非異瓶具色，非依瓶有色，非有瓶依色。)
3. 若見二相異，謂離瓶有同，二相既有殊，應離瓶有異。
[索]如果見有性與瓶，總別二相是異，便說離瓶子實體有同（有性），但按理非是這樣，若是這樣，同（有性）為何不異於瓶呢？
(若見二相異，謂離瓶有同，非爾是則同，何不異於瓶。)
問曰：瓶有實體，因為有一、二等德數異體所依故。
4. 若一不名瓶，瓶應不名一，瓶一曾無合，瓶應無一名。
[索]如果一等德數不叫做瓶，那麼瓶也不應叫做一；此瓶與所具德數並非相等，由此瓶亦不是一。
(若一不名瓶，瓶應不名一，此具非相等，由此亦非一。)
5. 若色遍於實，色實得大名，敵論若非他，應申自宗義。
[索]如果色能遍於實質，色實際上得到了「大德」的名稱；敵方觀點若非他宗而是自宗，即應申自宗教義駁斥敵論，（然汝怎麼能以自宗來難內道呢？
問曰：他性異體的功德雖已破除，但所相──瓶子尚未破除，因此瓶有自性。
6. 有數等能相，顯所相不成，除此更無因，故諸法非有。
[索]非是由於能相而能成立其所相實有，所以此中離於一、二德數等，實有自性的瓶體亦應非有。
(非由於能相，能成其所相，此中異數等，實性亦非有。)
7. 離別相無瓶，故瓶體非一，一一非瓶故，瓶體亦非多。
[索]離開色等八微別相外無有瓶，所以瓶體不是自性獨立一體；而八微的一一體都不是瓶體，所以瓶體也不是多體。
問曰：由八微互相接觸和合即可成為一瓶，所以瓶子是實有。
8. 非無有觸體，與有觸體合，故色等諸法，不可合為瓶。
[索]瓶非是由無有觸體的色香味觸，與有觸體的地水火風和合成一體，所以色等八微諸法，不可能和合成為實有的瓶。
問曰：觸與非觸雖然互不相觸，但是有觸與非觸的和合，故瓶是實有。
9. 色是瓶一分，故色體非瓶，有分既為無，一分如何有。
[索]色只是瓶的一分，所以色體非是瓶；有分（瓶）既然無實體存在，那麼一一支分怎麼會有自性存在呢？
10. 一切色等性，色等相無差，唯一類是瓶，餘非有何理。
[索]在一切瓶等粗大色法的體性上，色等八微的性相無有差別，而只有一類是瓶，其餘的不是，這有什麼道理依據呢？
11. 若色異味等，不異於瓶等，瓶等即味等，色何即瓶等。
[索]若許色異於香味等，而不異於瓶等本體，但是無有異於色的香味等法，瓶的自體即成無有，因此瓶怎麼不異於色呢？
(若色異味等，不異於瓶等，無彼等自無，如何不異色。)
12. 瓶等既無因，體應不成果，故若異色等，瓶等定為無。
[索]瓶等諸法既然無自性生因，其體不應成為有自性的果，所以若異於色等支分，瓶等決定無有自性。
問曰：瓶是觀待自己的泥團等支分而生起的果，因此瓶子的自因存在，瓶體實有自性。
13. 瓶等因若有，可為瓶等因，瓶等因既無，如何生瓶等。
[索]如果說瓶子是由自因泥團而生起，而泥團復從其他因緣而成，如此因法自體尚不能成立，那如何能生起實有的他體果呢？
(若瓶由因生，因復從他成，自體尚不成，如何能生他。)
問曰：瓶雖然是眾多支分合成的，但是支分能合為一體，所以瓶有自性。
14. 色等和合時，終不成香等，故和合一體，應如瓶等無。
[索]色香等支分和合時，色始終不會成為香等其他支分，所以色香等和合而成為一體，應如同瓶的實體一樣無有存在。
15. 如離於色等，瓶體實為無，色體亦應然，離風等非有。
[索]如同離色香等微塵的聚合外，瓶體實為無有；而色體也應同樣，離風等大種外無有存在。
問曰：離開大種則無有色體等，然而大種不觀待任何他法，所以應許大種實有。
16. 暖即是火性，非暖如何燒，故薪體為無，離此火非有。
[索]暖就是火的本性，如果薪柴燃料不是暖熱，又怎麼燒呢？所以不觀待火則薪體無有，離此薪體，火亦非有存在。
問曰：薪是堅等體性，而非暖性，但由火的燃燒使它成為暖，所以薪是所燒，火是能燒。
17. 餘煖雜故成，如何不成火，若餘不成煖，由火法應無。
[索]其餘薪由於可以與火交雜成為暖熱，為什麼它不能成為能燒的火呢？如果其餘薪不能雜火成為暖熱，則不可說彼上有火存在。
(餘煖雜成故，如何不成火，若餘不成煖，不可說彼有。)
問曰：由於火極微中無有其餘的三大種，所以雖然無有所燒薪，能燒火也可以實有存在。
18. 若火微無薪，應離薪有火，火微有薪者，應無火極微。
[索]若火的極微中無有薪，應成離薪無因有火；若火的極微中有薪，則應無有單獨一體的極微。
(若火微無薪，應離薪有火，火微有薪者，則無一極微。)
19. 審觀諸法時，無一體實有，無體既非有，多體亦應無。
[索]仔細觀察諸法時，任何法無實有一體存在，既然不存實有的一體，實有的多體亦應無有。
20. 若法更無餘，汝謂為一體，諸法皆三性，故一體為無。
[索]若認為任何法離地等極微更無其餘法，汝等（勝論師）便說地極微等為一體常法，而汝宗又許諸法中皆有三性，以此實有的一體不能成立。
21. 有非有俱非，一非一雙泯，隨次應配屬，智者達非真。
[索]對有、非有、亦有亦非有（雙俱）、非有非非有（雙非）的邊執，以一非一雙皆泯滅之正理，隨此四邊之次第應當配屬，即分別予以遮破，智者以此即能了達四邊皆非真實。
問曰：如果說一切法全然無有自性，即不會使敵論者得到滿意，因為敵論者認為一切法都成實常有，那麼是什麼原因使他們生起如是執著呢？
22. 於相續假法，惡見謂真常，積集假法中，邪執言實有。
[索]對相續假立諸法，愚夫以惡見故說為真常；在積集假法中，愚夫以邪執故說為實有。
問曰：若認為我們見諸法是邪見，而不許諸法實有，則應成諸法都不能見，都成為無有，這是不合理的。
23. 諸法眾緣成，性羸無自在，虛假依他立，故我法皆無。
[索]無論何法若是從眾因緣而生成，彼即無有自在（即不能無礙地自性存在），因此等諸法本來皆無自在，所以人我法我皆非實有。
(若有從緣成，彼即無自在，此皆無自在，是故我非有。)
24. 果眾緣合成，離緣無別果，如是合與果，諸聖達皆無。
[索]諸法若無有自性果體，那麼就都無有真實的因緣和合；若為了取果而和合因緣，則聖者以根本智可現見彼等無有和合。
(諸法若無果，皆無有和合，為果而和合，聖見彼無合。)
25. 識為諸有種，境是識所行，見境無我時，諸有種皆滅。
[索]心識是諸三有的種子，而色聲等境是識的所行之處；如果已見色等諸境無我（自性）時，諸有種子皆會息滅。
CHAPTER 14
326. If a thing did not depend
On anything else at all
It would be self-established,
But such a thing exists nowhere.
327. "The form is a pot" -- they are not one.
The pot that has form is not separate.
The pot does not have form,
Nor does the form have a pot.
328. Since the two are seen to have dissimilar
Characteristics, if the pot is separate
From existence, why would existence
Not also be separate from the pot?
329. If one is not accepted as the pot
The pot also is not one.
Moreover possession is not reciprocal,
Therefore also it is not one.
330. If the form is the size of the substance,
Why is the form not large?
If the opponent were not different
Scriptural sources could be cited.
331. By virtue of its characteristic
The characterized does not exist.
Such a thing has no existence
As something different from number and so forth.
332. Because the pot is not separate
From its characteristics, it is not one.
If there is not a pot for each,
Plurality is not feasible.
333. The tangible and the intangible
Cannot be said to coalesce.
Thus it is in no way feasible
For these forms to coalesce.
334. Form is a component of the pot
And thus, for a start, is not the pot.
Since the compound does not exist,
Neither do the components.335. If the definition of form
Applies without incongruity
To all forms, for what reason
Is one a pot and not all others?
336. If you assert form is distinct from
Taste and so forth but not from the pot,
How can that which does not exist
Without these not be distinct from form?
337. The pot has no causes
And is itself not an effect.
Thus there is no pot at all
Apart from form and so forth.
338. If the pot exists by virtue of its causes
And those causes by virtue of others,
How can that which does not exist
By virtue of itself produce something disparate?
339. Though they meet and come together
Form cannot be smell.
Therefore like the pot
The composite cannot be one.
340. Just as the pot does not exist
Apart from form and so forth,
Likewise form does not exist
Apart from air and so forth.
341. That which is hot is fire but how
Can that burn which is not hot?
Thus so-called fuel does not exist
And without it fire too does not.
342. Even if it is hot only when
Overpowered, why is it not fire?
Yet if not hot, to say fire contains
Something else is not plausible.
343. If the particle has no fuel
Fire without fuel exists.
If even it has fuel, a single-natured
Particle does not exist.
344. When different things are examined
None of them have singleness.
Because there is no singleness
There is no plurality either.
345. Though they assert that where there are none
Of those things there is singleness,
Singleness does not exist
Since everything is threefold.
346. The approach of existence, non-existence,
Both existence and non-existence, and neither,
Should always be applied by those
With mastery to oneness and so forth.
347. When the continuum is misapprehended,
Things are said to be permanent.
Similarly when composites are
Misapprehended, things are said to exist.
348. Anything that has dependent arising
Is not independent.
All these are not independent,
Therefore there is no self.
349. Things do not assemble
Unless there is an effect.
Aggregation for an effect
Is not included for the Exalted.
350. The awareness that is the seed of existence
Has objects as its sphere of activity.
When selflessness is seen in objects,
The seed of existence is destroyed.
