[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) › 38.64 # 大般涅槃經集解 38.64 大般涅槃經集解 38.64 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [38.64](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.38.64) 案僧亮曰：是有是無是名空空者，謂是有空亦空也，是無空亦空也。以後空空於前空，故立空空，以破執相者之所存也。是是非是是名空空者，初二是雙稱上句也，次是雙非，次是結句也。所以然者，欲遣後空，不得不本其所空，故雙非然後結句也。僧宗曰：九空是遣有，唯有此空人情生著謂有此空，是可得故，所以遣也。是有是無者，謂汝前九空所遣之有、能遣之無，亦無此無也。為遣有故說無，豈有無之可待耶？是則有無斯空，故言空空也。是是非是是名空空者，物情於遣著之中展轉生患，言向以空遣有，此是相對得稱，故宜不可得也。今謂二著俱捨，此心為勝，欲保此捨心，復為患矣。是是者，指環中之旨也。若謂以此為極，亦無此也。是則心之與理俱不可得，謂空空也。寶亮曰：此是法雲地之所得也。空空有二種，如昔小乘觀於萬有是空，愛著此空，故言此空即是空，亦名作空空也。復有一種，觀萬有是一空，此觀空之智復即體是空，此亦是空空也。今言空者，悉不同上二種空空。何者？從九地以還至信首五根，非不相貌，信知八自在我空。但九地以來盡作無我觀，乘此無我空觀來至十地，少分見八自在我空。以乘空得空，故言空空，亦即空三昧也。乃是二乘所迷沒處者，讚歎此空理妙，非己心所緣也。是有是無者，為二法名也。是有者，謂九地以來所得無我空。此無我空，由斷滅空。又此既是事像之法，故還作有名說也。是無者，是八自在我空也。得此空時，有無之心皆不行也。若作有取亦不得，作無取亦不得，有無二心既得行，便是中道解，故言是無也。為二法名竟，後結言是名空空也。是是者，解會此旨，謂平定之意也，還是前九也。所得無我，事像之空也。事像是有法，故言是是也。非是者，還非九地人。謂九地以來所得空解為極，今則非極。若乘無我空得八自在我空，得言非是向者九地所得空，故言非是也。故文言「十住尚於是中通達少分，況九地以還得耶？」不作此解，則不會經文意也。 > Sengliang comments: Regarding 'is being, is non-being, this is called the emptiness of emptiness': this means that the emptiness of being is also empty, and the emptiness of non-being is also empty. Because a subsequent emptiness empties the prior emptiness, the 'emptiness of emptiness' is established in order to shatter the fixations of those who grasp at marks. Regarding 'is true, is not true, this is called the emptiness of emptiness': the first 'is' affirms the preceding line; the second 'is' negates both; and the next is the concluding phrase. Why is this? Wishing to eliminate the subsequent emptiness, one cannot but trace back to what it emptied; hence one negates both and then concludes the phrase. Sengzong says: The nine emptinesses are meant to eliminate being. It is only with this emptiness that human sentiment gives rise to attachment, thinking that this emptiness exists and can be attained; therefore it is eliminated. 'Is being, is non-being' means that both the 'being' eliminated by the preceding nine emptinesses and the 'non-being' capable of eliminating it—even this non-being does not exist. Non-being is spoken of in order to eliminate being; how could there be a non-being to depend upon? Thus both being and non-being are empty, hence it says 'the emptiness of emptiness'. Regarding 'is true, is not true, this is called the emptiness of emptiness': human sentiment progressively gives rise to affliction in the midst of eliminating attachment, saying: 'Previously one used emptiness to eliminate being; this obtained its name in relative terms, and so properly could not be grasped.' Now, supposing both attachments are abandoned, this mind is considered superior; yet wishing to preserve this abandoning mind is again an affliction. 'Is true' points to the core import within the circle. If one takes this as ultimate, this too does not exist. Thus both mind and principle are unattainable; this is called 'the emptiness of emptiness'. Baoliang says: This is what is attained on the stage of the Dharma Cloud. There are two kinds of emptiness of emptiness. For instance, in the past the Śrāvakayāna contemplated all beings as empty and became attached to this emptiness; therefore, saying that this emptiness is itself empty is also called 'the emptiness of emptiness'. Furthermore, there is another kind: contemplating all beings as a single emptiness, this wisdom that contemplates emptiness is itself empty in its essence; this too is 'the emptiness of emptiness'. The emptiness spoken of now is entirely different from the two kinds of emptiness of emptiness above. Why? From the ninth stage down to the five faculties headed by faith, it is not that there are no characteristics; they faithfully know the eightfold sovereign self-emptiness. Yet up through the ninth stage, they all perform the contemplation of no-self; riding on this contemplation of no-self emptiness to reach the tenth stage, they partially see the eightfold sovereign self-emptiness. Because one obtains emptiness by riding on emptiness, it is called the emptiness of emptiness, and it is also the samādhi of emptiness. As for 'the place where the two vehicles sink in confusion': this praises this principle of emptiness as subtle, not something cognized by their minds. 'Is being, is non-being' provides names for two dharmas. 'Is being' refers to the no-self emptiness obtained up through the ninth stage. This no-self emptiness is due to the emptiness of annihilation. Moreover, since this is a dharma of concrete phenomena, it is therefore still spoken of as having being. 'Is non-being' refers to the eightfold sovereign self-emptiness. When one obtains this emptiness, minds of being and non-being both cease to function. If one grasps at being, it cannot be attained; if one grasps at non-being, it cannot be attained. When the two minds of being and non-being cease to function, this is the understanding of the middle way; hence it says 'is non-being'. Having designated the names for the two dharmas, it then concludes by saying 'this is called the emptiness of emptiness'. 'Is true' understands and accords with this import, referring to a sense of calm determination; it is still the former ninth \[stage's understanding\]. It is the concrete emptiness of no-self that was attained. Since concrete phenomena are existent dharmas, it therefore says 'is true'. 'Is not true' again negates the practitioner of the ninth stage. Taking the understanding of emptiness attained up through the ninth stage as ultimate is, in fact, not ultimate. If by riding on no-self emptiness one obtains the eightfold sovereign self-emptiness, one can say that it is not the emptiness previously obtained on the ninth stage; hence it says 'is not true'. Therefore the text says: 'Even the tenth stage only penetrates a small portion of it; how much less could those on the ninth stage and below attain it?' If one does not make this interpretation, one will not accord with the sūtra's meaning. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 38.63](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.38.63) - [Next: 38.65](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.38.65) - [Up: 38](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.38) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763~en-mt.38.64) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.38.64](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.38.64) · Pramāṇa