[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) › 46.20 # 大般涅槃經集解 46.20 大般涅槃經集解 46.20 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [46.20](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.46.20) 案道生曰：佛說而彼聽，即顯聞矣。更與四句，以盡其美也。僧亮曰：答前有應定有之難也。謂有為之法雖有，而修道則無、不修則有，何得難言有必定有也。答初難已，五難自釋也。僧宗曰：此四句，二句渾法、二句定理，有渾有定，豈可一句執定耶？有不聞聞者，若聲未生之時為不聞，眾緣會在於現，是則名為向不聞法今得聞也。理亦如是，雖不可聞，非不假詮以入理，豈可定說耶？有不聞不聞者，此一句還定理也。有聞不聞者，復是渾句也。前難意欲使定是聞者不可為不聞，故此云聞不聞也。謂已聞之聲謝在過去者，不可重聞矣。有聞聞者，還定聲教是可聞也。謂前聲亦生耳識，後聲亦生耳聞也。寶亮曰：正答問也。此四句並置涅槃之上。初不聞聞者，不聞謂涅槃也。未有機感，所以名為不聞；今日緣發則聞，故云本所不聞今得聞也。有不聞不聞者，此不聞與前不聞言同而旨異。前舉涅槃體不可聞，此舉眾生無感機故不聞斯理也。又一解：前不聞法身滅。聞與不聞，但關眾生，惑故見耳，是則雖聞即不聞也。有聞不聞者，眾生有緣感，故一往得聞。若更不進德，後不復重聞，故言聞不聞也。有聞聞者，初有感故得聞，後更進德，則有重聞之義也。智秀曰：此通遣諸難也。體絕名相，非是可聞之法。藉緣具故，得聞其名，謂不聞者聞也。不聞者，涅槃之理，於無德者無能聞之緣也。聞不聞者，聲是聞法，一謝之後不可重聞也。聞聞者，可聞之法從緣，而前念後念皆可聞。 > Daosheng notes: When the Buddha speaks and the other listens, hearing is thereby made manifest. He further provides the four propositions to exhaust its excellence. Sengliang notes: This answers the earlier objection concerning 'what exists must determinately exist.' It means that although saṃskṛta dharmas exist, when one cultivates the Path they do not, and when one does not cultivate it they do exist; how could one object that what exists must determinately exist? Having answered the first objection, the five objections are naturally resolved. Sengzong notes: Of these four propositions, two propositions blend dharmas and two determine the principle. Since there is blending and there is determination, how could one cling determinately to a single proposition? As for 'unheard hearing': when sound has not yet arisen, there is non-hearing; when the assembly of conditions meets in the present, this is termed 'now coming to hear the dharma that was previously unheard.' The principle is also like this: although it cannot be heard, it is not that one does not rely on exposition to enter the principle; how could one speak of it determinately? As for 'unheard non-hearing': this proposition returns to determining the principle. As for 'heard non-hearing': this is again a blending proposition. The intention of the previous objection was to make what is determinately heard incapable of being non-heard; hence it says here 'heard non-hearing.' This means that once a sound that has already been heard passes away into the past, it cannot be heard again. As for 'heard hearing': this returns to determining that the verbal teaching can be heard. It means that the preceding sound produces ear-consciousness, and the subsequent sound also produces ear-hearing. Baoliang notes: This directly answers the question. These four propositions are all predicated of nirvāṇa. First, as for 'unheard hearing': 'unheard' refers to nirvāṇa. Before there is capacity and resonance, it is therefore termed 'unheard'; today, when conditions arise, one hears it; hence it is said, 'what was originally unheard is now heard.' As for 'unheard non-hearing': this 'unheard' has the same words as the previous 'unheard' but a different purport. The former raised the essence of nirvāṇa as incapable of being heard; this raises sentient beings' lack of a resonant capacity, so that they do not hear this principle. Another explanation: The former meant that the dharmakāya's extinction is not heard. Hearing and non-hearing only concern sentient beings; it is through delusion that they perceive it, so that although it is heard, it is indeed not heard. As for 'heard non-hearing': because sentient beings have conditional resonance, they temporarily get to hear it. If they do not further advance in virtue, they will not hear it again later; hence it is said 'heard non-hearing.' As for 'heard hearing': because initially there is resonance, one gets to hear it; later, advancing further in virtue, there is the sense of hearing it repeatedly. Zhixiu notes: This comprehensively dispels the objections. Its essence transcends names and marks; it is not a dharma that can be heard. Because relying on the complete gathering of conditions, one gets to hear its name, it is called 'what is unheard is heard.' 'Unheard' is the principle of nirvāṇa, for which those without virtue have no conditions capable of hearing it. 'Heard non-hearing' means that sound is a dharma of hearing, but once it passes away it cannot be heard again. 'Heard hearing' means that dharmas that can be heard depend on conditions, and both previous thought-moments and subsequent thought-moments can be heard. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 46.19](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.46.19) - [Next: 46.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.46.21) - [Up: 46](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.46) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763~en-mt.46.20) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.46.20](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.46.20) · Pramāṇa