[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) › 20.46 # 大般涅槃經集解 20.46 大般涅槃經集解 20.46 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [20.46](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.20.46) 案道生曰：苟能自生，何用必續相似之後耶？僧亮曰：若自生者，不應須乳也。若必續乳而生，不能無因，非自力也。則不俱生者，以續故不俱。若能自生，亦可俱也。不從餘處來者，向以不俱明不不自生，復似從餘處而來續彼後也。僧宗曰：此難有三重，一謂不應續乳、二謂應與乳並、三謂應異處來也。 > Daosheng states: If it could produce itself, why must it necessarily follow upon what is similar? Sengliang states: If it were produced from itself, it ought not to require milk. If it necessarily arises in succession to milk, it cannot lack a cause, so it is not by its own power. As for 'then they are not co-arisen,' because it is successive, they are not simultaneous. If it could produce itself, they could also be simultaneous. As for 'does not come from any other place,' previously by non-simultaneity it was shown not to be self-produced, yet it also appears as though it comes from another place to succeed upon the other. Sengzong states: This refutation has three levels: first, saying it should not succeed milk; second, saying it should be simultaneous with milk; third, saying it should come from a different place. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 20.45](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.20.45) - [Next: 20.47](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.20.47) - [Up: 20](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.20) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763~en-mt.20.46) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.20.46](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.20.46) · Pramāṇa