2013年6月19日 星期三

聞所成地-4.因明處--4.6.論出離


4.6.論出離
論出離者 ,謂立論者,先應以彼三種觀察,觀察論端,方興言論,或不興論,名論出離。三種觀察者,一、觀察得失;二、觀察時眾;三、觀察善巧及不善巧。
[]什麼是論出離呢?立論的人,先應以彼三種情況來觀察,觀察論的開始,預先要想好。然後再開始說出來言論。或者不要同人家辯論,先觀察好,這就從過失裏面出來,我不犯過失。哪三種觀察?一、觀察得失,二、觀察時眾,三、觀察善巧及不善
巧。vādaniḥsaraṇaṃ katamat/ trividhayā parīkṣayā suparīkṣya vādasyākaraṇato vā karaṇato vā/ vādaniḥsaraṇam ity ucyate/ trividhā parīkṣā katamā/ guṇadoṣaparīkṣā parṣatparīkṣā kauśalyaparīkṣā ca/
1. DECISION WHETHER TO UNDERTAKE THE DEBATE
The undertaking or not undertaking of the debate, when one carefully considers by three kinds of consideration, is called 'decision whether to undertake the debate'. What are the three kinds of consideration? Consideration of the merits and demerits; consideration of the assembly; consideration of the skill.

1)觀察得失者,謂立論者,方興論端,先當觀察,我立是論,將無自損、損他及俱損耶?不生現法、後法及俱罪耶?勿起身心諸憂苦耶?莫由此故,執持刀杖,鬥罵諍訟,諂誑妄語而發起耶?將無種種惡不善法而生長耶?非不利益、安樂,若自若他,及多眾耶?非不憐愍諸世間耶?不因此故,諸天世人無義、無利、不安樂耶?
[]什麼是觀察得失?立論的人,在建立言論的開始的時候,先當觀察我建立這樣的言論,將來是不是損害自己,也損害他人?也損害自己,也損害他人,叫做俱損。或者但是損害自己,不損害他人;或者是損害他人,不損害自己;或者自己他人都是有損害。建立這樣的言論,是不是給現在的生命引發罪過;或者,將來有罪過;或者現在也有罪過,將來也有罪過。或者若建立這樣的言論,是不是有可能生起身苦、心憂苦呢?不要由這個言論,而引起執持刀杖,互相鬥罵諍訟、諂誑妄語。將來會有這麼多的惡不善法的罪過生起呢?是不是能利益自己和他人及多眾,安樂自己及他人及多眾呢?是不是對世間有哀愍心呢?不會因此,諸天世人無義、無利、不安樂耶?
guṇadoṣa-parīkṣā katamā/ yathāpi/ tad vādī vādārambhī evaṃ pratyavekṣate/ sacetiyam me vādakriyā ātmavyābādhāya saṃvartate paravyābādhāyobhaya-vyābādhāya / dṛṣṭa-dhārmikasyāvadyasya prasavāya sāmparāyikasya/ dṛṣṭa-dharma-sāmparāyikasya/ taj-jātasya caitasikasva duḥkha-daurmanasya / śastrādāna-daṇḍādāna-kalaha-bhaṇḍana-vigraha- vivādānāṃ śāṭhyavadana-nikṛtimṛṣā-vādānām/ aneka-vidhānāṃ pāpakānām akuśalānāṃ dharmāṇām utpattaye/ nātma-hitāya na parahitāya na bahujanahitāya na bahujanasukhāya na lokānukampāya nārthāya hitāya sukhāya devamanuṣyāṇām/
A. What is consideration of the merits and demerits (gunadosa)? As follows: That debater, formulating a debate, carefully considers in this manner: whether my debating would be harmful to myself, harmful to others, harmful to both; whether incurring blame in the present time, future time, or both present and future time; and arising therefrom, the mental natures sorrow and dissatisfaction, the taking up of a weapon, the taking up of a staff, strife, fault picking, schism, contention, deceitful words, harm and lies, and many kinds of sinful, unvirtuous natures. And one reviews in his mind whether there would be a disservice to oneself, a disservice to the other, a disservice to many persons, a displeasure to many persons, a failure of compassion toward the world, against the aim, benefit, and happiness of gods and men.

彼立論者,如是觀時,若自了知我所立論,能為自損,乃至天人無義無利亦無安樂,便自思勉,不應立論。若如是知,我所立論不為自損,乃至能引天人義利及與安樂,便自思勉,當立正論。是名第一或作不作論出離相。
[]彼立論者,如是觀察的時候,若自己知道我所立論,能為自損,乃至天人無義、無利,亦無安樂的話,便自己思惟,勉強自己,我不應該立論。若能夠這樣知道,我所立論,不為自損,也不損他,乃至能引天人義利,及引天人的安樂。便自思勉,應該建立正論。是名第一,或者是立論,或者是不立論,就是出離過失。sacet sa evaṃ pratyavekṣamāṇo jānīyād/ iyam me vādakriyā ātma-vyābādhāya saṃvartate vistareṇa yāvan nārthāya hitāya sukhāya devamanuṣyāṇām/ ten vādīnā pratisaṃkhyāya vādo na kartavyaḥ/sacet punaḥ sa evaṃ pratyavekṣa- māṇo jānīyād iyaṃ me vādakriyā nātma-vyabādhāya vistareṇa yāvad arthāya hitāya sukhāya devamanuṣyāṇāṃ/ tena vādinā pratisaṃkhyāya vādaḥ karaṇīyañ/ idaṃ prathamaṃ vādaniḥsaraṇaṃ/ yad uta/ akaraṇato vā karaṇato vā/
And if one has in this manner carefully considered, and realizes, if I were to inaugurate it, it would be harmful to myself, and so on, down to, against the aim, benefit, and happiness of gods and men-that debater, having carefullv considered, should not undertake the debate. But, if, after carefully considering in this manner, were I to undertake the debate, realizes that it would not be harmful to himself, and so on, down to, it would be the aim, benefit, and happiness of gods and men, that one, having so considered, should inaugurate it. This is the first decision whether to undertake the debate, that is, either not undertaking it or undertaking it.

2)觀察時眾者,謂立論者方起論端,應善觀察現前眾會,為有僻執、為無執耶?為有賢正、為無有耶?為有善巧、為無有耶?
[]什麼是觀察時眾?立論者,方起論端的時候,應善觀察現前這個集會的人。是不是有不合道理的執著?還是沒有執著呢?是賢哲的人,是品德好,有智慧的人?為無有耶?為有善巧通達法義的人?為無有耶?parṣat-parīkṣā katamā/ yathāpi tad vādī evaṃ pratyavekṣate/ kiṃ tv· iyaṃ parṣad abhiniviṣṭā vā 'nabhiniviṣṭā vā/ sabhyā vā 'sabhyā vā/ kuśalā vā 'kuśalā vā/ sacet sa evaṃ pratyavekṣa- māṇo jānīyād iyaṃ parṣad anabhiniviṣṭā na 'bhiniviṣṭā 'sabhyā na sabhyā 'kuśalā na kuśalā tena vādinā pratisaṃkhyāya tasyāṃ parṣadi kathā na karaṇīyā/

如是觀時,若知眾會唯有僻執,非無僻執;唯不賢正,無有賢正;唯不善巧,無善巧者,便自思勉,於是眾中不應立論。若知眾會無所僻執,非有僻執;唯有賢正,無不賢正;唯有善巧,無不善巧,便自思勉,於是眾中應當立論。是名第二或作不作論出離相。
[]如是觀察的時候,若知眾會唯有僻執,非無僻執,唯不賢正的人,無有賢正;只有沒善巧通達法義的人。便自思勉,於是眾中不應立論。若知眾會沒有那些邪僻執著的這些外道,非有僻執;唯有賢正,無不賢正;唯有善巧通達法義的人,無不善巧的人。便應思勉,於是眾中應當立論。是名第二,或作、不作論出離相。sacet sa evaṃ pratyavekṣamāṇo jānīyād iyaṃ parṣad abhiniviṣṭā nānabhiniviṣṭā sabhyā nāsabhyā kuśalā nākuśalā tena vādinā pratiṣaṃkhyāya tasyāṃ parṣadi kathā karaṇīyā/ idaṃ dvitīyaṃ vādaniḥsaraṇaṃ yad utākaraṇato vā karaṇato vā/
B. What is consideration of the assembly (parsat)? As follows: The 'first speaker' carefully considers, is it that this assembly is of fixed mind, or of open mind, a good assembly or a bad assembly, expert or amateur? If, having so considered, he realizes that it is not of open mind, i.e. is of fixed mind; is not a good assembly, i.e. is a bad assembly; is not expert, i.e. is amateur, then that surveyor, having carefully considered, should not undertake a discussion to that assembly. If, upon considering, he realizes that this assembly is open-minded, not of fixed mind; is a good assembly, not a bad assembly; expert, not amateur then that 'first speaker', having carefully considered, should undertake a discussion to that assembly. This is, namely, the second decision whether to undertake the debate, that is, either not undertaking it or undertaking it.

3)觀察善巧、不善巧者,謂立論者方起論端,應自觀察善與不善。我於論體、論處、論依、論嚴、論負、論出離等,為善巧耶?不善巧耶?我為有力能立自論,摧他論耶?於論負處,能解脫耶?
[]什麼是觀察善巧、不善巧?立論者,方起論端的時候,應自己要觀察善與不善。怎麼觀察呢?我對於論的體性、論處所、論所依、論莊嚴、論墮負、論出離等,為善巧耶?不善巧耶?能夠勝任這件事呢?我有智慧的力量,能建立自己的理論,來摧伏對方的理論呢?對於論負處的這種過失,能夠解脫這個過失嗎?kauśalyaparīkṣā katamā yathāpi tad vādī ātmani kauśalyam upaparīkṣate/ kiṃ tu kuśalo 'haṃ vādasya vādādhikaraṇasya vādādhiṣṭānasya vādālaṃkārasya vādanigrahasya āhosvid akuśalo vā/ kiṃ tu pratibalo 'ham svasiddhāntaṃ sthāpayituṃ nigrahasthānād vimuktaḥ paravādaṃ ca nigṛhītum/
C. What is the consideration of skill (kausalya)? As follows: The 'first speaker' carefully considers whether he/she is skilled, (thinking:) Am I skilled in the setting of the debate, in the foundation of the debate, in the ornaments of the debate, in the points of defeat in the debate; or am I not skilled (in them)? Am I capable of establishing my own theory-system (siddhanta); and freed from the points of defeat in the debate, (capable) of defeating the opposing position?

如是觀時,若自了知我無善巧,非有善巧;我無力能,非有力能,便自思勉,與對論者不應立論。若自了知我有善巧,非無善巧;我有勢力,非無勢力,便自思勉,與對論者當共立論。是名第三或作不作論出離相。
[]如是觀的時候,若自了知我無善巧,非有善巧;我無力能,非有力能。便自思勉,與對論者不應立論。自己若明白自己有這樣的善巧智慧,非無善巧;我有勢力,非無勢力。便自思勉,與對論者當共立論。是名第三或作不作論出離相。sacet sa evaṃ pratyavekṣamāno jānīyād akuśalo 'ham na pratibalaḥ/ tena vādinā pratisaṃkhyāya prativādinam kathā na karaṇīyā/ sacet sa evaṃ pratyavekṣ- amāno jānīyāt kuśalo 'haṃ nākuśalaḥ pratibalo 'haṃ nāpratibalaḥ tena vādinā pratisaṃkhyāya prativādinaṃ kathā karaṇīyā/ ity ucyate tṛtīyaṃ vādaniḥsaraṇaṃ yad utākaraṇato vā karaṇato vā/ ayam ucyate vādaniḥsaraṇam/
If upon so considering, one realizes that one is not skilled, an amateur; is not a match for it, i.e. unequal to the task-then that 'first speaker', having carefully considered, should not undertake a discussion to the 'respondent'. If, upon considering, one realizes that one is skilled, not an amateur; that one is a match for it, i.e. not unequal (to the task), then that 'first speaker', having carefully considered, should undertake a discussion to the 'respondent'. This is, namely, the third decision whether to undertake the debate, that is, either not undertaking or undertaking it. The foregoing is called 'decision whether to undertake the debate'.

沒有留言:

張貼留言