[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) › 57.72 # 大般涅槃經集解 57.72 大般涅槃經集解 57.72 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [57.72](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.57.72) 案僧亮曰：難意承上戒定次第相生，而得稱常，其義未顯，故問也。若由智得滅，滅是本無今有，有即是生，生即是滅。直以不更生更滅名常者，生亦如是，即生即滅，不更生更滅亦應常也。寶亮曰：是生雖復當體，不辯住滅名之為常，要有始終不恒，故非涅槃也。 > Sengliang remarks: "The intent of the objection builds upon the preceding point that precepts and concentration arise in succession, yet it is called permanent. Since its meaning is not yet clear, he questions it. If cessation is attained by means of wisdom, cessation is an existence that was previously non-existent; existence is production, and production is destruction. If it were called permanent simply because it is not produced again and destroyed again, production would also be like this: immediately produced and immediately destroyed, without being produced again or destroyed again, so it too should be permanent." Baoliang says: "Although this production is its own entity without discriminating abiding and perishing to be called permanent, it must have a beginning and an end and is not constant; therefore it is not nirvāṇa." > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 57.71](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.57.71) - [Next: 57.73](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.57.73) - [Up: 57](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.57) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763~en-mt.57.72) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.57.72](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1763.57.72) · Pramāṇa