Investigation of Error

(return to list of Contents & Translation of "Mulamadhyamakakarika: Verses from the Centre")

23. Investigation of Error

(Confusion)

1. /'dod chags zhe sdang gti mug rnams //kun tu rtog las 'byung bar gsungs //sdug dang mi sdug phyin ci log //brten pa nyid las kun tu 'byung/

1. It is said that desire, hatred, stupidity arise from conceptuality; they arise in dependence on the pleasant, the unpleasant and confusion. [they arise in dependence on confusion about the pleasant and unpleasant]

[K. 312 reads: “perversions regarding the pleasant and unpleasant (i.e. confusing pleasure and displeasure”) for l.c. (Inada and Streng agree.) Chandrakirti and Tsongkhapa differ. My tr. follows Ts. 383. The Tibetan could be read either way. The Skt. translation develops the meaning of conceptuality. C. and Ts. quote the rten ‘brel gyi mdo: “What is the cause of ignorance? Inappropriate attention. Stupidity arises from corrupt attention (yid la byed pa rnyog pa).”]

2. /gang dag sdug dang mi sdug dang //phyin ci log las brten 'byung ba //de dag rang bzhin las med de //de phyir nyon mongs yang dag med /

2. Whatever arises in dependence upon the pleasant, the unpleasant and confusion, (whatever arises in dependence on confusion about the pleasant and unpleasant) they have no own-nature, therefore, afflictions do not really exist (do not exist in themselves).

[Although the Tibetan supports this reading by adding dang before phyin ci log (thereby making error the third item of a list), the Skt. repeats the exact wording of v.1. Ts. 384 notes the different commentarial glosses on these two verses.]

3. /bdag gi yod nyid med nyid ni //ji lta bur yang grub pa med //de med nyon mongs rnams kyi ni //yod nyid med nyid ji ltar 'grub /

3. The existence or non-existence of self is not established in any way. Without that, how can the existence or non-existence of afflictions be established?

4. /nyon mongs de* dag gang gi yin //de yang grub pa yod ma yin //'ga' med par ni gang gi yang //nyon mongs pa dag yod ma yin /

[* Ts. and Lha. ‘di]

4. These afflictions are someone’s. But that [someone] is not established. Without [someone], the afflictions are not anyone’s.

5. /rang lus lta bzhin nyon mongs rnams //nyon mongs can la rnam lngar med //rang lus lta bzhin nyon mongs can //nyon mongs pa la rnam lngar med /

5. Like [the self apprehended in] the view of one’s own body, the afflictions do not exist in five ways in the afflicted. Like [the self apprehended in] the view of one’s own body, the afflicted does not exist in five ways in the afflictions.

6. /sdug dang mi sdug phyin ci log //rang bzhin las ni yod min na //sdug dang mi sdug phyin ci log //brten nas nyon mongs gang dag yin /

6. If confusion about the pleasant and unpleasant does not exist from its own nature, what afflictions can depend on confusion about the pleasant and unpleasant?

7. /gzugs sgra ro dang reg pa dang //dri dang chos dag rnam drug ni //gzhi ste 'dod chags zhe sdang dang //gti mug gi ni yin par brtags /

7. Colour/shape, sound, taste, tactile sensation, smell and dharmas: these six are conceived as the basis of desire, hatred and stupidity.

8. /gzugs sgra ro dang reg pa dang, //dri dang chos dag 'ba' zhig ste //dri za'i grong khyer lta bu dang //smig rgyu rmi lam 'dra ba yin /

8. Colour/shape, sound, taste, tactile sensation, smell and dharmas: these are like gandharva-cities and similar to mirages, dreams.

9. /sgyu ma'i skyes bu lta bu dang //gzugs brnyan 'dra ba de dag la //sdug pa dang ni mi sdug pa //'byung bar yang ni ga la 'gyur /

9. How can the pleasant and unpleasant occur in those [things] which are like phantoms and similar to reflections?

[K. 317 takes this to mean “how can pleasure or displeasure arise in people who are like illusions etc.” This makes little sense in context, and the word “people” is not in the original. G. hedges his bets and opts for ambiguity. Ts. 387 explains this as a question about how the “marks” (mtshan ma) of pleasure and displeasure can occur in the six sense objects. So: how can the features of likeability and unlikeability occur in the objects themselves?]

10. /gang la brten nas sdug pa zhes //gdags par bya ba mi sdug pa //sdug la mi ltos yod min pas //de phyir sdug pa 'thad ma yin /

10. Something is called “pleasant” in dependence on the unpleasant. Since that would not exist without relation to the pleasant, therefore, the pleasant is not tenable.

11. /gang la brten nas mi sdug par //gdags par bya ba sdug pa ni //mi sdug mi ltos yod min pas //de phyir mi sdug 'thad ma yin /

11. Something is called “unpleasant” in dependence on the pleasant. Since that would not exist without relation to the unpleasant, therefore, the unpleasant is not tenable.

12. /sdug pa yod pa ma yin na //'dod chags yod par ga la 'gyur //mi sdug yod pa ma yin na //zhe sdang yod par ga la 'gyur /

12. If the pleasant does not exist, how can desire exist? If the unpleasant does not exist, how can hatred exist?

13. /gal te mi rtag rtag pa zhes //de ltar 'dzin pa log yin na //stong la mi rtag yod min pas //'dzin pa* ji ltar log pa yin /

[*Lha. pa’ang]

[Ts. 389 says that the other three confusions (re: happiness, purity and self) can be substituted for that about impermanence. He gives an alternative for c-d from the “other two great commentaries”: /stong la rtag pa yod min pas//’dzin pa ji ltar log ma yin/]

13. If such an apprehension as “the impermanent is permanent” is confused, since impermanence does not exist in the empty, how can such an apprehension be confused?

14. /gal te mi rtag rtag go zhes //de ltar 'dzin pa log yin na //stong la mi rtag pa'o zhes //'dzin pa'ang ji ltar log ma yin /

14. If such an apprehension as “the impermanent is permanent” is confused, how would the apprehension “there is impermanence in the empty” also not be confused?

15. /gang gis 'dzin dang 'dzin gang dang //'dzin pa po dang gang gzung ba //thams cad nye bar zhi ba ste //de phyir 'dzin pa yod ma yin /

15. [The means] by which one apprehends, the apprehension [itself], the apprehender and the apprehended: all are completely pacified, therefore there is no apprehending.

16. /log pa'am yang dag nyid du ni //'dzin pa yod pa ma yin na //gang la phyin ci log yod cing //gang la phyin ci ma log yod /

16. If there is neither confused nor right apprehension, who is confused and who is not confused?

17. /phyin ci log tu gyur pa la //phyin ci log dag mi srid de //phyin ci log tu ma gyur la //phyin ci log dag mi srid de //

17. Confusions do not occur for those who are [already] confused; confusions do not occur for those who are not [yet] confused;

18. /phyin ci log tu gyur bzhin la //phyin ci log dag mi srid de //gang la phyin ci log srid pa //bdag nyid kyis ni rnam par dpyod /

18. confusions do not occur for those who are being confused. For whom do confusions occur? Examine this by yourself!

19. /phyin ci log rnams ma skyes na //ji lta bur na yod par 'gyur //phyin ci log rnams skye med na //phyin ci log can ga la yod /

19. If confusions are not born, how can they exist? If confusions are not born, where can there be someone who has confusion?

20. /dngos po bdag las mi skye ste //gzhan las skye ba nyid ma yin //bdag dang gzhan las kyang min na //phyin ci log can ga la yod /

20. Things are not born from themselves, not born from others. If they are also not from self and others, where can there be someone who has confusion?

[K. points out that this verse is missing in Kumarajiva’s translation (I. also says it’s missing from the Tibetan version) and is “almost identical with XXI: 13.” It seems redundant here.]

21. /gal te bdag dang gtsang ba dang //rtag dang bde ba yod na ni //bdag dang gtsang dang rtag pa dang //bde ba phyin ci log ma yin /

21. If self and purity and permanence and happiness were existent, self and purity and permanence and happiness would not be confusions.

22. /gal te bdag dang gtsang ba dang //rtag dang bde ba med na ni //bdag med mi gtsang mi rtag dang //sdug bsngal yod pa ma yin no /

22. If self and purity and permanence and happiness were non-existent, selflessness, impurity, impermanence and anguish would not exist.

23. /de ltar phyin ci log 'gags pas //ma rig pa ni 'gag par 'gyur //ma rig 'gags par gyur na ni //'du byed la sogs 'gag par 'gyur /

23. Thus by stopping confusion, ignorance will stop. If ignorance is stopped, impulsive acts etc. will stop.

24. /gal te la la'i nyon mongs pa //gang dag rang bzhin gyis yod na //ji lta bur na spong bar 'gyur //yod pa su zhig spong bar byed /

24. If the afflictions of some existed by their own nature, how could they be let go of? Who can let go of what exists by nature?

[Skt. gives svabhavam for yod pa in l.d]

25. /gal te la la'i nyon mongs pa //gang dag rang bzhin gyis med na //ji lta bur na spong bar 'gyur //med pa su zhig spong bar byed /

24. If the afflictions of some did not exist by their own nature, how could they be let go of? Who can let go of what does not exist?

phyin ci log brtag pa zhes bya ba ste rab tu byed pa nyi shu gsum pa'o // //