[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [大般涅槃經集解](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763) › 13.42 # 大般涅槃經集解 13.42 大般涅槃經集解 13.42 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [13.42](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.13.42) 案僧亮曰：或有是色或非是色者，以無累為解脫，身智無累亦是解脫。先定之也。二乘解脫者，分段煩惱滅稱為解脫，而身智有為，非解脫也；如來身智無為，得名解脫也。云何住者，謂相假名義得立住；若其無色解脫之名，依何而住？非色者，聲聞身智亦無麁結，直以少故，說為非色耳。僧宗曰：將明無累，先正其體。體苟不無，則孤滅權顯。論其樞要，在於色耳。今言聲聞非色者，不能垂形六道也。為眾生故說非色者，昔教但言捨身盡滅，不說三事。既無三事，則無法身垂應之色，故言非色也。云何住者，假執昔教無色為難，欲令佛釋二乘之人非都無色，是故佛以非想為喻，實有細色，說為非色。二乘涅槃亦爾，小應色，直是于時不得說也。 > Sengliang notes: 'Either is form or is non-form': taking freedom from entanglements as vimokṣa, the body and cognition free of entanglements are also vimokṣa. He first determines this. In the vimokṣa of the two vehicles, the extinction of saṃsāric afflictions of fragmented lifetimes is called vimokṣa, but their body and cognition are saṃskṛta and not vimokṣa; the body and cognition of the Tathāgata are asaṃskṛta and receive the name vimokṣa. 'How does it abide?': meaning that by relying on conventional designations, its meaning can stand and abide; if it has no form, on what does the name of vimokṣa abide? 'Non-form': the body and cognition of a śrāvaka also lack coarse bonds; merely because they are meager, they are described as non-form. Sengzong says: Intending to clarify freedom from entanglements, he first rectifies its essence. If the essence is not non-existent, then solitary extinction is revealed as provisional. Discussing its pivot, it lies in form. Now saying that the śrāvaka is non-form means that they cannot manifest bodies across the six destinies. That it is called non-form for the sake of sentient beings means that the past teaching only spoke of abandoning the body into complete extinction, not speaking of the three factors. Lacking the three factors, there is no form of responsive manifestation of the dharmakāya; hence it is called non-form. 'How does it abide?': provisionally grasping the past teaching of non-form as an objection, he wishes to have the Buddha explain that people of the two vehicles are not entirely without form; therefore the Buddha uses the stage of neither perception nor non-perception as an analogy, where there is truly subtle form though it is spoken of as non-form. The nirvāṇa of the two vehicles is also like this: they have minor responsive forms, but it simply could not be taught at that time. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 13.41](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.13.41) - [Next: 13.43](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.13.43) - [Up: 13](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.13) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763~en-mt.13.42) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.13.42](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.13.42) · Pramāṇa