[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) › 19.78 # 大般涅槃經集解 19.78 大般涅槃經集解 19.78 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [19.78](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.19.78) 案僧亮曰：自在者，是我義。無師自悟者，是覺義。無有非法，是法義。眾法和合，是僧義。此四者，體一而名異也。僧宗曰：第三段也。上雖勸信，要令安心有所，故勸分別善識真偽，捨昔偽三、憑今真一也。此則域情無謬、發軫則趣之要道也。就此辯三歸中，可有五章差別也。第一以三偈半，一往直勸歸真三寶也。第二有十偈，迦葉懷疑，未受今說。第三有四偈半，更為開釋，洗彼二疑。第四有四偈，迦葉更執也。前有三疑滯在有無，而聞釋洗也；今真偽未了，便欲兩歸。第五說長行，更為解釋梯橙之意、虛實之旨也。善分別者，分別昔歸為權、今歸為實也。則我性者，不假捨我自身而歸彼佛也。寶亮曰：下有三偈半，正明三歸相也。一往且令舍昔三歸及釋迦一體三歸，唯勸自歸未來身中一體三寶。若此心一立，則三種三歸悉皆成就也。善分別者，別相三寶與今釋迦一體三歸皆不免過。何者？以丈六為佛、以十二部經為法、以三乘聖眾為僧，而魔所化形、所說邪法、行魔法者，亦可歸依，並是形骸中取，何得免濫耶？若就釋迦一體三歸，亦不免過。何者？以丈六為迹、法身為本，約本取迹，如為小勝。然同是形骸，魔亦能爾，豈容得免？法僧二寶亦復如是也。唯自歸依我未來身一體三寶，此無失謬，非唯免過，乃成三種德也。一者識前兩時所說三歸之失，驗歸未來為是。既安心有在，豈畏魔來亂其正解耶？二者既有正智，心用則曠，審明金剛心後真實一體三歸必是我寶，含識眾生理與我同，莫問成佛近遠，皆可歸憑也。三者既判此寶審屬於我，則明鑒因果，無八倒之惑。何者？此人理然識佛地是常、生死無常，亦何行而不建耶？三心既立、三過又除，所以勸人分別三歸，旨在於此也。 > Sengliang comments: Being autonomous is the meaning of 'self'. Awakening by oneself without a teacher is the meaning of 'enlightenment' (Buddha). Being without non-dharma is the meaning of 'Dharma'. The harmonious union of all phenomena is the meaning of 'Saṅgha'. These four are identical in substance but different in name. Sengzong says: This is the third section. Although he previously exhorted faith, it is essential to give the mind a resting place; therefore, he exhorts them to make distinctions, skillfully recognizing the true and the false, abandoning the former false three and relying on the present true one. This is the essential path for anchoring the mind without error and setting out directly toward the goal. Within this discussion of the three refuges, there are five distinct sections. First, in three and a half stanzas, he directly exhorts them at the outset to take refuge in the true Three Jewels. Second, in ten stanzas, Kāśyapa harbors doubts and does not yet accept the present teaching. Third, in four and a half stanzas, he further explains and resolves them, washing away those two doubts. Fourth, in four stanzas, Kāśyapa clings again. Previously, he had three doubts stuck in existence and non-existence, but upon hearing the explanation they were washed away; now, having not yet resolved the true and the false, he wishes to take refuge in both. Fifth, in the prose section, he further explains the intent of the ladder and steps, and the purport of the provisional and real. 'Skillfully distinguish' means distinguishing the former refuge as provisional and the present refuge as real. 'Precisely the nature of myself' means that one does not need to abandon one's own body to take refuge in that external Buddha. Baoliang says: The three and a half stanzas below directly clarify the characteristics of the three refuges. At the outset, he has them temporarily abandon the former three refuges as well as Śākyamuni's single-essence three refuges, and solely exhorts them to take refuge in the single-essence Three Jewels within their own future bodies. If this intention is once established, all three kinds of three refuges are completely fulfilled. 'Skillfully distinguish': both the Three Jewels of distinct characteristics and the present Śākyamuni's single-essence three refuges do not avoid fault. How so? Taking the sixteen-foot \[manifestation\] as the Buddha, the twelve divisions of the canon as the Dharma, and the noble assembly of the three vehicles as the Saṅgha, then forms manifested by Māra, false teachings spoken \[by Māra\], and those who practice Māra's teachings could also be taken as refuges; since all these are grasped within physical form, how could they avoid confusion? If one takes Śākyamuni's single-essence three refuges, they also do not avoid fault. How so? Taking the sixteen-foot body as the trace and the dharmakāya as the root, grasping the trace with reference to the root seems slightly superior. Yet, as both are physical forms, Māra can also \[manifest\] thus; how could it be avoided? The two jewels of Dharma and Saṅgha are also like this. Only taking refuge in the single-essence Three Jewels of one's own future body is without error; not only does it avoid fault, but it also accomplishes three kinds of virtues. First, recognizing the defects of the three refuges taught in the previous two periods, one verifies that taking refuge in the future is correct. Since the mind has a secure place, how could one fear Māra coming to disrupt one's correct understanding? Second, having correct wisdom, the mind's application is vast, clearly understanding that the true single-essence three refuges after the vajra-mind must be one's own treasure, and that all sentient beings possessing consciousness share the same principle with oneself; regardless of whether their attainment of Buddhahood is near or far, all can be relied upon. Third, having determined that this treasure definitely belongs to oneself, one clearly perceives cause and effect without the delusion of the eight inversions. Why? This person naturally recognizes that the Buddha-stage is permanent and birth-and-death is impermanent; what practice would they not establish? When the three minds are established and the three faults are removed, the intent in exhorting people to distinguish the three refuges lies precisely here. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 19.77](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.19.77) - [Next: 19.79](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.19.79) - [Up: 19](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.19) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763~en-mt.19.78) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.19.78](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.19.78) · Pramāṇa