宗喀巴_三主要道英文版及解释-第20章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


omena。　However　then；　when　we　look　at　the　other　reasoning　…　the　'king　of　reasonings'；　that　of　dependent　arising　or　dependent　origination；　this　reasoning　is　one　which　is　renowned　as　the　king　for　what　reason？　For　the　reason　that　the　Mind　Only　school　use　this　reasoning　to　prove　true　existence；　whereas　the　Madhyamika　school　use　this　to　prove　non…true　existence。　So　everybody　is　ing　down　to　this　same　point　of　dependent　arising；　and　through　this　reason　it　is　renowned　as　the　'king　of　reasons'　or　the　king　of　correct　signs；　when　set　in　a　syllogism。

So　as　our　text　here　principally　deals　with　the　reasoning　of　dependent　arising；　then　we　will　follow　this　line　reasoning　（if　we　can　go　through　the　fourfold　analysis；　so　much　the　better）；　but　if　we　just　stick　with　the　text　then　what　we　are　going　through　is　the　reasoning　of　dependent　origination　or　dependent　arising；　so　let　us　then　stick　with　that。　It　is　always　better　to　use　one　line　of　reasoning　because　in　dependence　upon　one　line　of　reasoning　one　can　e　to　understand　the　truth　of　the　thesis；　then　as　one　has　understood　the　truth　of　that　thesis　then　there　is　no　need　to　then　entertain　another　reasoning　to　again　prove　that　same　thesis　because　one　has　already　proved　that　to　oneself。

So　in　order　to　set　the　syllogism　then；　if　we　lay　it　out　using　as　the　subject　a　sprout　（we　can　actually　use　any　kind　of　subject；　for　example　a　human　being　or　whatever　but　let　us　just　use　the　example　which　is　given　in　the　text；　then　the　subject　a　sprout）。　So　it’s　very　important　that　we　understand　that　in　order　to　set　a　thesis；　we　have　to　have　a　subject　…　a　basis　upon　which　we　are　going　to　discuss　a　natural　or　autonomous　existence；　because　if　we　are　just　talking　about　having　or　lack　of　autonomous　existence；　we　have　to　have　something　which　we　are　going　to　look　at；　something　which　we　are　going　to　focus　upon　when　we　start　to　engage　in　this　reasoning。　If　we　don’t　have　a　basis　of　a　discussion　or　argument；　our　argument　is　going　to　spiral　out　of　control。

So　here　then　we　will　look　at　the　subject　（in　this　case　a　sprout）　and　the　thesis　which　is　to　be　proven　about　that　is　its　lacking　autonomous　existence　or　lacking　a　natural　inherent　existence。　So　that　is　what　is　to　be　proven　then；　and　the　reasoning；　or　the　sign；　which　is　going　to　be　set　forth；　is　that　it　is　lacking　that　natural　existence　or　autonomous　existence　because　it　is　dependent　arising。　So　here　then；　if　we　have　a　look；　we　have　three　things：　We　have　the　subject　which　is　the　sprout；　that　which　is　to　be　proven　about　it　（or　the　thesis）　–　that　it　is　lacking　natural　or　autonomous　existence；　and　then　the　sign；　or　the　reason；　for　that　–　because　it　is　a　dependent　arising。　So　the　sprout　then　is　something　which　is　dependent　arising　and　if　we　look　at　this　in　the　simplest　way　then；　it　is　something　which　es　into　existence　in　dependence　upon　its　causes　and　conditions。　So　as　it　is　a　subject　which　has　e　into　existence　in　dependence　upon　a　cause；　in　dependence　upon　a　condition；　then　it　is　not　something　which　is　existing　naturally　in　and　of　itself；　because　if　it　was　existing　in　and　of　itself　it　wouldn’t　rely　on　phenomena　other　than　itself　to　e　into　existence　because　it　would　already　be　there；　naturally　or　autonomously　existing；　it　wouldn’t　have　to　rely　upon　the　various　causes　and　conditions　which　bring　about；　or　bring　forth；　its　existence。　Thus　then　the　reasoning　of　dependent　arising　looked　at　in　this　way　…　that　the　sprout　arises　in　dependence　upon　its　causes　and　conditions　…　therefore　proves　that　the　sprout　in　and　of　itself　is　not　existing　in　such　an　autonomous　way；　but　rather　has　e　about　as　a　product　of　various　causes　and　conditions。

The　Praise　to　Dependent　Origination

So　then　this　reasoning　of　dependent　arising　is　further　elaborated　upon　in　the　prayer　by　Lama　Tsong　Khapa　called　The　Praise　to　Dependent　Origination　within　which　he　says　that　anything　that　has　arisen　in　dependence　upon　a　cause　and　a　condition　is　something　which　lacks　autonomous　existence；　and　this　understanding　is　one　which　is　most　beautiful　and　which　needs　no　further　elaboration。　So　here　then　if　we　look　at　the　object　of　our　analysis；　if　that　object　is　one　which　is　has　arisen　in　dependence　upon　objects　which　are　other　than　it；　that　is　to　say；　causes　and　conditions；　then　it　cannot　exist　in　an　autonomous；　self…existing　way。　This　is　because　if　it　were　existing　in　such　a　way　it　wouldn’t　need　to　rely　upon；　it　wouldn’t　need　to　depend　upon；　its　causes　and　conditions　which　brought　it　into　being。

Now　the　source　of　Lama　Tsong　Khapa’s　words　here　are　from　the　Rare　Stalk　sutra；　within　which　it　explains　about　how　phenomena　exist　in　a　dependent　way；　and　how　viewing　them　in　a　way　which　is　contrary　to　that；　that　is　to　say；　in　an　autonomous　way　is　then　a　false　or　a　wrong　way　of　viewing　phenomena。　So　this　goes　on　to　tell　us　that　something　which　arises　in　dependence　upon　causes　and　conditions　must　exist；　because　if　it　were　a　non…existent；　we　could　not　talk　about　it　ing　into　existence；　or　we　could　not　talk　about　it　being　generated；　so　this　has　to　be　something　which　exists。　So　if　it　is　something　that　exists；　how　does　it　exist？　So　then　it　has　e　into　existence　in　dependence　upon　its　causes　and　conditions；　so　therefore　it　has　dependently　arisen。　So　it　is　an　object　which　we　can　perceive；　it　has　dependently　arisen。

However　then　if　we　view　this　in　a　contrary　way；　that　is　to　say；　in　a　way　which　doesn’t　accord　with　that　reasoning；　that　is　to　say；　we　view　it　as　something　which　is　autonomously　existent；　then　the　third　line　tells　us　then；　this　object　which　we　are　viewing　cannot　possibly　exist　in　such　an　autonomous　way　because　it　lacks　such　natural　existence　for　the　very　reason　that　it　has　depended　upon　causes　and　conditions　to　e　into　existence；　and　that　is　proved　then　through　looking　at　the　subject　and　seeing　how　it　has　arisen　in　dependence　upon　its　causes　and　conditions。　So　if　it　something　that　has　depended　upon　others；　that　is　to　say；　something　other　than　it；　to　e　into　existence；　then　it　cannot　naturally　or　autonomously　exist　from　its　own　side。　So　cognising　this　reality　is　said　to　be　the　mind　or　the　awareness　which　destroys　the　father　…　that　is　to　say；　the　cognition　or　the　ignorance　which　understands　phenomena　in　a　wrong　or　in　a　false　manner　is　like　the　father　which　gives　rise　to　the　children　of　the　destructive　emotions。　So　if　one　negates　that；　it　is　as　if　one　has　removed　the　source　of　all　of　the　destructive　emotions。

So　dependent　arising　then　…　when　we　think　of　an　object；　if　this　object　exists　in　dependence　upon　causes　and　conditions　which　are　other　than　it；　that　is　to　say；　it　has　arisen　in　dependence　upon　those　other　causes　and　conditions；　then　there　is　no　way　that　this　object　can　exist　in　and　of　itself；　for　the　very　reason　existing　in　and　of　itself　implies　not　depending　upon　other　phenomena；　or　other　causes　and　conditions　or　whatever；　to　e　into　existence。　So　if　something　is　lacking　this　inherent　existence；　it　is　something　which　has　arisen　in　dependence　upon　its　causes　and　conditions；　for　no　naturally　existing　or　autonomous　phenomena　can　e　into　existence　in　dependence　upon　its　causes　and　conditions　because　at　the　very　time　of　those　causes　and　conditions；　this　object　must　already　exist　in　the　way　we　are　perceiving　it　to　exist；　that　is　to　say　in　the　wrong　way。　So　this　understanding　of　emptiness　then　is　mentioned　by　Aryadeva　by　saying　that　through　understanding　emptiness　in　dependence　upon　any　object；　once　we　have　understood　that　–　the　empty　nature　of　phenomena　–　at　that　moment　we　have　uprooted　the　seed　of　the　cycle　of　existence。　The　reason　for　this　is　given　–　because　the　seed　of　the　cycle　of　existence　is　the　confusion　or　the　ignorance　which　grasps　onto　autonomous　or　true　existence；　so　then　through　understanding　the　falseness　or　the　wrongness　of　that　nature；　we　have　pletely　cast　out　that　wrong　view。　Its　analogy　is　of　having　plucked　a　seed　from　the　earth　–　nothing　can　thereafter　grow　from　that；　so　in　a　similar　fashion；　no　other　confusion　can　e　through　this　mistaken　view。

So　as　is　further　mentioned　by　Aryadeva　in　the　Four　Hundred　Verses；　for　a　person　who　doesn’t　have　much　merit　or　positive　potential；　that　individual　is　one　for　whom　the　mere　speculation　of　emptiness　is　something　which　is　very　far　away　from　their　being；　from　their　mi