[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) › 55.48 # 大般涅槃經集解 55.48 大般涅槃經集解 55.48 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [55.48](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.55.48) 案僧亮曰：第三門因緣也。因成就名眼見，亦是聞見。因不成就，雖識佛，不名眼見，亦非聞見也。二種者，外細內麁、內細外麁，善惡難知也。寶亮曰：第二文，約佛弟子所行法觀因。佛唯極果，無因可觀。若不舉弟子所行，則無以為驗。佛果若不真，那得信佛語者，盡得實解，故知其理必可信。今者師子吼先舉上菴羅果喻四品人來驗，若內外俱熟、內外俱生，此亦易別；餘外熟內生、外生內熟，此之二人云何得知？佛言此實難知。雖曰難知，當以四法來驗，必知真實。若論此四法，正是共住、智慧。開共住為二、智慧為兩，故成四句。若用此四法，則知持戒破戒。 > Sengliang comments: The third approach concerns conditions. When the cause is perfected, it is termed seeing with the eye and also hearing and seeing. If the cause is not perfected, even though one recognizes the Buddha, it is not termed seeing with the eye, nor is it hearing and seeing. The "two kinds" refer to being subtle on the outside and coarse on the inside, or subtle on the inside and coarse on the outside, where good and evil are difficult to discern. Baoliang says: The second passage contemplates the cause with reference to the practices of the Buddha's disciples. The Buddha is solely the ultimate fruit and has no cause that can be contemplated. If one does not bring forward the practices of the disciples, there would be no means of verification. If the Buddha-fruit were not genuine, how could those who believe the Buddha's words all attain true understanding? Therefore, one knows that his principle is definitely worthy of trust. Now, Siṃhanāda first brings forward the earlier āmrāta-fruit metaphor of the four classes of persons for verification: if someone is both ripe inside and out, or both raw inside and out, this is also easy to distinguish; as for the remaining two persons—ripe outside and raw inside, or raw outside and ripe inside—how are these two persons to be known? The Buddha states that these are indeed difficult to know. Although said to be difficult to know, they should be verified by means of four dharmas, and one will surely know their reality. If we discuss these four dharmas, they are precisely cohabitation and wisdom. Dividing cohabitation into two and wisdom into two, they thus form four propositions. If one employs these four dharmas, then one will know who upholds the precepts and who breaks the precepts. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 55.47](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.55.47) - [Next: 55.49](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.55.49) - [Up: 55](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.55) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763~en-mt.55.48) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.55.48](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.55.48) · Pramāṇa