Chapter 3
第三章
3.1Then the bodhisattva Suviśuddhamati addressed the Blessed One, “Blessed One, at an earlier time, you spoke these words: ‘The ultimate is subtle and profound. Characterized as transcending what is distinct or indistinct [from conditioned phenomena], it is difficult to understand.’ How wonderful indeed are these words of yours! Blessed One, regarding this point, I once saw many bodhisattvas who, having attained the stage of engagement through aspiration, assembled in one place to discuss in the following way whether conditioned phenomena and the ultimate are distinct or indistinct. Among them, some declared, ‘The defining characteristic of conditioned phenomena and the defining characteristic of the ultimate are indistinct.’ Others replied, ‘It is not the case that the defining characteristic of conditioned phenomena and the defining characteristic of the ultimate are indistinct, for they are distinct indeed.’ [F.7.a] Some others, who were perplexed and lacked certainty, said, ‘Some pretend that the defining characteristic of conditioned phenomena and the defining characteristic of the ultimate are distinct. Some pretend that they are indistinct. Which bodhisattvas speak the truth? Which speak falsity? Which are mistaken? Which are not?’ Blessed One, I thought to myself, ‘So, none of these noble sons understands the ultimate whose subtle defining characteristic transcends whether it is distinct or indistinct from conditioned phenomena. These bodhisattvas are truly naive, confused, dull, unskilled, and mistaken.’ ”
3.1爾時菩薩善清淨慧白薄伽梵言：「薄伽梵，昔日世尊曾作如是言論：『勝義甚深微妙，以超越差別與不差別為相，難以領悟。』世尊此言真是奇妙！薄伽梵，關於此點，我曾見過許多菩薩，已證得信位，聚集在一處討論有為法與勝義是否差別或不差別。其中有些菩薩宣言：『有為法的相與勝義的相是不差別的。』其他菩薩回答：『有為法的相與勝義的相並非不差別，因為二者確實是差別的。』又有其他菩薩，彷徨困惑、缺乏定見，說道：『有些菩薩宣稱有為法的相與勝義的相是差別的。有些菩薩宣稱二者是不差別的。哪些菩薩說的是真實之言？哪些說的是虛妄之言？哪些菩薩錯誤？哪些菩薩未曾錯誤？』薄伽梵，我思念而言：『這樣看來，沒有一位聖子了解勝義，其微妙的相超越於與有為法的差別或不差別。這些菩薩確實是無知、迷惑、愚鈍、不善、錯誤的。』」
3.2The Blessed One replied to the bodhisattva Suviśuddhamati, “So it is, Suviśuddhamati. So it is. Indeed, none of these noble sons understands the ultimate whose subtle defining characteristic transcends whether it is distinct or indistinct from conditioned phenomena. These [bodhisattvas] are truly naive, confused, dull, unskilled, and mistaken. Why is this so? Suviśuddhamati, it is because those who analyze conditioned phenomena in this way neither realize nor actualize the ultimate.
3.2薄伽梵對菩薩清淨慧說道：「清淨慧，就是這樣，清淨慧，就是這樣。確實，這些高貴的兒子們沒有人理解那微妙的、其相超越了與有為法是否區別或不區別的究竟。這些菩薩確實很天真、混亂、遲鈍、不善巧，而且認識有誤。為什麼是這樣呢？清淨慧，正是因為那些以這種方式分析有為法的人既不能證悟也不能現證究竟。」
3.3“Why? Suviśuddhamati, if the defining characteristic of conditioned phenomena and the defining characteristic of the ultimate were indistinct, [even] spiritually immature people—all ordinary beings—would, as a consequence, realize the truth. As mere ordinary beings, [F.7.b] not only would they attain nirvāṇa, the unsurpassable good, but they would also fully and completely awaken to unsurpassable complete and perfect awakening.
3.3「為什麼呢？善現慧菩薩，如果有為法的相和勝義的相不分別，那麼異生凡夫界所有的凡夫就會因此而通達勝義。作為凡夫，他們不僅會證得涅槃這個無上善，還會圓滿究竟覺悟無上正等正覺。
“If the defining characteristic of conditioned phenomena and the defining characteristic of the ultimate were distinct, even those who realize the truth would, as a consequence, not be detached from the phenomenal appearances of conditioned phenomena. Since they would not be detached from the phenomenal appearances of conditioned phenomena, they would also not be liberated from the bondage of phenomenal appearances. If they were not liberated from the bondage of phenomenal appearances, they would not be liberated from the bondage of corruption. If they were not liberated from these two kinds of bondage, those who realize the truth would neither attain nirvāṇa, the unsurpassable good, nor fully and completely awaken to the unsurpassable complete and perfect awakening.
「如果有為法的相和勝義的相是有區別的，那麼即使領悟真諦的人，也因此不會遠離有為法的現象。既然他們不會遠離有為法的現象，他們也就不會從現象縛中解脫。如果他們沒有從現象縛中解脫，他們也不會從煩惱縛中解脫。如果他們沒有從這兩種束縛中解脫，那麼領悟真諦的人既不能證得涅槃這無上的善，也不能圓滿成就無上正等正覺。」
“Suviśuddhamati, ordinary beings do not realize the truth and, as mere ordinary beings, neither do they attain nirvāṇa, the unsurpassable good, nor do they fully and completely awaken to the unsurpassable complete and perfect awakening. For these reasons, it is not correct to say that the defining characteristic of conditioned phenomena and the defining characteristic of the ultimate are indistinct. Regarding this point, you should know through this approach that those who consider the defining characteristic of conditioned phenomena and the defining characteristic of the ultimate to be indistinct are not right but wrong.
「清淨慧菩薩，凡夫不能夠證悟真實，身為凡夫，既不能夠獲得涅槃這無上殊勝的善法，也不能夠圓滿地證得無上正等正覺。基於這些理由，說有為法的相和勝義的相不區別是不正確的。關於這一點，你應該知道，通過這種方式理解，那些認為有為法的相和勝義的相不區別的人是錯誤的，而不是正確的。」
“Suviśuddhamati, it is not the case that those who realize the truth are not detached from the phenomenal appearance of conditioned phenomena, for they are indeed detached from it. Neither are they not liberated from the bondage of phenomenal appearance, for they are indeed liberated from it. Nor are they not liberated from the bondage of corruption, for they are indeed liberated from it. Since they are liberated from these two kinds of bondage, [F.8.a] not only do they attain nirvāṇa, the unsurpassable good, but they will also fully and completely awaken to the unsurpassable complete and perfect awakening. For all these reasons, it is not correct to say that the defining characteristic of conditioned phenomena and the defining characteristic of the ultimate are distinct. Regarding this point, you should know through this approach that those who consider the defining characteristic of conditioned phenomena and the defining characteristic of the ultimate to be distinct are not right but wrong.
「善慧，悟入真實義的人並非不能遠離有為法的現象，他們確實遠離了它。他們也並非不能解脫現象縛，他們確實解脫了它。他們也並非不能解脫煩惱縛，他們確實解脫了它。因為他們解脫了這兩種結縛，所以他們不僅證得涅槃——無上的殊勝善利，而且會圓滿地覺悟無上正等正覺。基於所有這些理由，說有為法的相與勝義的相是有區別的，這是不正確的。關於這一點，你應該透過這個方式瞭解，那些認為有為法的相與勝義的相是有區別的人並非正確，而是錯誤的。」
3.4“Moreover, Suviśuddhamati, if the defining characteristic of conditioned phenomena and the defining characteristic of the ultimate were indistinct, then, just as the defining characteristic of conditioned phenomena is encompassed by the defining characteristic of affliction, so too would the defining characteristic of the ultimate be included in the defining characteristic of affliction.
3.4「而且，善慧藏菩薩，如果有為法的相和勝義的相不分別，那麼就如同有為法的相被煩惱的相所包攝一樣，勝義的相也會被包含在煩惱的相中。
“However, Suviśuddhamati, if the defining characteristic of conditioned phenomena and the defining characteristic of the ultimate were distinct, then the defining characteristic of the ultimate could not be the universal defining characteristic within all the defining characteristics of conditioned phenomena.
「善慧淨眼，如果有為法的相與勝義的相是不同的，那麼勝義的相就不能是遍於一切有為法的相的普遍相。」
“Suviśuddhamati, the defining characteristic of the ultimate is not encompassed by the defining characteristic of affliction, and the defining characteristic of the ultimate is the universal defining characteristic within all the defining characteristics of conditioned phenomena. For these reasons, it is not correct to say that the defining characteristic of conditioned phenomena and the defining characteristic of the ultimate are either indistinct or distinct. Regarding this point, you should know through this approach that those pretending that the defining characteristic of conditioned phenomena and the defining characteristic of the ultimate are indistinct or distinct are not right but wrong.
「善慧，勝義的相不被煩惱的相所包攝，勝義的相是遍於一切有為現象的相的普遍相。因為這些原因，說有為現象的相與勝義的相不分別或分別，是不正確的。關於這一點，你應該通過這個方法來認知：那些假裝有為現象的相與勝義的相不分別或分別的人並非正確，而是錯誤的。」
3.5“Moreover, Suviśuddhamati, if the defining characteristic of conditioned phenomena and the defining characteristic of the ultimate were not distinct, [F.8.b] then, just as the defining characteristic of the ultimate is not specific to any defining characteristic of conditioned phenomena, so too would all defining characteristics of conditioned phenomena not be specific to any conditioned phenomenon, and yogis would also not look for the ultimate beyond whatever they see, hear, distinguish, or know with regard to conditioned phenomena.
3.5「而且，妙善慧，如果有為法的相與勝義的相不是相異的，那麼就像勝義的相不是專屬於任何有為法的相一樣，所有有為法的相也不會專屬於任何有為法，瑜伽修行者也就不會在他們所見、所聞、所辨別或所認知的有為法之外去尋求勝義。」
“However, Suviśuddhamati, if the defining characteristic of conditioned phenomena and the defining characteristic of the ultimate were distinct, then, the mere selflessness and essencelessness of conditioned phenomena would not be the defining characteristic of the ultimate. The defining characteristic of affliction and the defining characteristic of purity themselves would be simultaneously established as distinct defining characteristics of conditioned phenomena.
「然而，善慧妙音，如果有為法的相與勝義的相是不同的，那麼，有為法的單純無我與無自性就不會是勝義的相。煩惱的相與清淨的相本身就會同時成立為有為法中不同的相。」
“Suviśuddhamati, the defining characteristics of conditioned phenomena are specific and not unspecific to conditioned phenomena; yogis do look for the ultimate beyond whatever they see, hear, distinguish, or know with regard to conditioned phenomena; the ultimate is indeed characterized by the mere selflessness and essencelessness of conditioned phenomena; and the defining characteristic of affliction and the defining characteristic of purity also are not simultaneously established as distinct defining characteristics of conditioned phenomena. For all these reasons, it is not correct to say that the defining characteristic of conditioned phenomena and the defining characteristic of the ultimate are neither indistinct nor distinct. Regarding this point, you should know through these approaches that those pretending that the defining characteristic of conditioned phenomena and the defining characteristic of the ultimate are indistinct or distinct are not right but wrong.
「修慧尊者，有為法的相是特定於有為法的，而不是不特定的；瑜伽士確實會超越他們對有為法所見、所聞、所分別、所認知的一切，而尋求勝義；勝義確實以有為法的純粹無我和無自性為特徵；而且煩惱的相和清淨的相也不是同時成立為有為法中互不相同的相。基於所有這些理由，說有為法的相和勝義的相既不是不區別也不是區別，這是不正確的。關於此點，你應該通過這些方式認識到，那些宣稱有為法的相和勝義的相是不區別或區別的人並非正確而是錯誤的。」
3.6“Suviśuddhamati, it is like this: It is not easy to decide whether the whiteness of the conch is distinct or indistinct from the defining characteristic of the conch, likewise with the yellowness of gold. It is not easy to decide whether the quality of the sound produced by a vīṇā is [F.9.a] distinct or indistinct from the defining characteristic of sound, likewise with aloe and its fragrance, pepper and its heat, myrobalan and its astringency, cotton and its softness, and clarified butter and butter. Thus it is not easy to decide whether the impermanence of all conditioned phenomena is distinct or indistinct from the defining characteristic of conditioned phenomena, likewise with the suffering of all beings with outflows and the defining characteristic of beings with outflows, as well as the selflessness of all phenomena and the defining characteristic of phenomena.
3.6善慧，是這樣的：不容易判斷螺貝的白色是否與螺貝的相區別或不區別，同樣地黃金的黃色也是如此。不容易判斷琵琶發出的聲音的品質是否與聲的相區別或不區別，同樣地沉香與其香氣、黑胡椒與其熱性、訶子與其澀性、棉花與其柔軟性、以及酥油與黃油也是如此。因此，不容易判斷一切有為法的無常是否與有為法的相區別或不區別，同樣地一切具有漏的有情界的苦與具有漏的有情界的相，以及一切現象的無我與現象的相也是如此。
“Suviśuddhamati, it is like this: It is not easy to decide whether the defining characteristic of restless desire and the defining characteristic of afflictions are distinct or indistinct from the defining characteristic of desire. You should know it is just like this with anger and delusion too. Likewise, Suviśuddhamati, you should not see anything good in deciding whether the defining characteristic of conditioned phenomena and the defining characteristic of the ultimate are distinct or indistinct. In this way, Suviśuddhamati, I have completely and fully awakened to the ultimate that is subtle, extremely subtle, [profound], extremely profound, difficult to understand, extremely difficult to understand, and characterized as transcending being distinct or indistinct from conditioned phenomena. Yet, after I attained complete and perfect awakening, I communicated through words, gave explanations, established distinctions, expressed myself through conventions, and [F.9.b] imparted teachings.”
「善慧，應當這樣理解：不容易判斷不安穩的欲望的相與煩惱的相，是否與欲望的相有區別或無區別。你應當知道，瞋和癡也是如此。同樣地，善慧，你不應當認為判斷有為法的相與勝義的相是否有區別或無區別有任何好處。就這樣，善慧，我已經完全徹底地覺悟了那微妙、極其微妙、深奧、極其深奧、難以理解、極其難以理解，並且具有超越與有為法有區別或無區別這一特點的勝義。然而，在我獲得無上正等正覺之後，我通過言語進行溝通，給予解釋，建立分別，用世俗諦表達自己，並傳授教法。」
3.7Then, at that moment, the Blessed One spoke these verses:
3.7那時，薄伽梵說出了這些偈頌：
This was the chapter of the bodhisattva Suviśuddhamati—the third chapter.
（結尾）