大般涅槃經集解 14

English (machine translation) 14

Language: English

14.1

Miscellaneous Extensive Exposition of the Meaning of Vimokṣa; Explanation of the Meaning of the Four Grasped Views Such as Identity

14.3

"Furthermore, vimokṣa is named profound [...] true vimokṣa is none other than the Tathāgata."

Mingjun notes: The previous text has finished expanding on the eight flavors above. Below, it further raises distinct meanings, which cannot be entered by the two vehicles. This generally praises it as profound and invisible.

14.5

"Furthermore, vimokṣa is named having no dwelling [...] true vimokṣa is none other than the Tathāgata."

14.6

Mingjun notes: He raises miscellaneous virtues, explaining them according to what beings delight in entering.

14.7

"Furthermore, vimokṣa is named severing all [...] untainted wholesome phenomena sever and block all paths."

14.8

Sengzong notes: It severs all paths of wrong views.

14.9

"Namely: whether self, non-self, neither self nor non-self."

14.10

Sengzong states: 'Self' is eternalism, and 'non-self' is annihilationism. 'Neither self nor non-self' is the proposition of the fourth school. The third school is omitted here. The third school says 'both self', which is not the same as the first school, and 'and non-self', which again is not the same as the second school. In saying they are 'not the same', this means they are not entirely the same, but only partially the same. Now the fourth school differs again from the third school: saying 'neither self' is not the same as the third school's refutation of self; saying 'nor non-self' is not the same as the third school's refutation of non-self. Although there are these statements, when examined and verified, it also cannot be different from the third school.

14.11

"Only cutting off clinging and attachment, not cutting off the view of self... [up to] ...true vimokṣa is the Tathāgata."

14.12

Sengzong states: Birth-and-death is not the self, yet arbitrarily one gives rise to the thought of a self—this is clinging and attachment, which ought to be cut off. Buddhadhātu is the principle; this is not cut off.

14.13

"Furthermore, vimokṣa is named 'not empty of emptiness'."

14.14

Sengliang states: Permanence, bliss, self, and purity are one reality; furthermore, vimokṣa from all sufferings is a second reality; therefore it is named 'not empty of emptiness'.

14.15

"Emptiness of emptiness is named non-existence... [up to] ...there is truly no vimokṣa; hence it is named the emptiness of emptiness."

14.16

Sengliang states: The vimokṣa posited by the Nirgranthas lacks permanence, bliss, self, and purity—this is the first emptiness. Furthermore, it is not vimokṣa—this is the second emptiness. Being named 'non-existence' means that its substance is impermanent and it is also not vimokṣa; it is that which has non-existence.

14.17

"True vimokṣa is not like this... [up to] ...and yet there is no reality of water, wine, and the like."

14.18

Sengzong states: The flask for water or wine is a metaphor for 'not empty of emptiness'. There may be no water, yet the vessel is not empty; this clarifies that nirvāṇa is merely empty of birth-and-death, whereas the eternal fruit is not empty.

14.19

"Vimokṣa is also like this: it cannot be spoken of as form... [up to] ...who experiences this permanence, bliss, self, and purity?"

14.20

Sengzong states: Manifesting forms across the six destinies, everywhere form is seen.

14.21

"For this reason, it cannot be spoken of as empty or as not empty... [up to] ...the Tathāgata is nirvāṇa."

14.22

Sengliang states: This is explained in terms of root and branches. Greed is the root of the fetters; marks are called the sphere of greed. Greed and that which is coveted bind one to the three realms of existence, and all afflictions arise from them; therefore, the reckoning of birth-and-death has cause and effect without end. Because greed is permanently cut off, they are progressively extinguished, and everything is vimokṣa.

14.23

"All sentient beings fear birth-and-death... [up to] ...anuttarāsamyaksambodhi."

14.24

Sengliang states: The above extensively explained vimokṣa to cause people to take refuge. The characteristics of phenomena are threefold. What are they? The characteristics of phenomena are eternally fixed, and priority is given to the one who is first awakened. The one first awakened is taking refuge in the Buddha. That which is awakened to is wondrous, which is taking refuge in the Dharma; for without the Dharma, it cannot be called awakening. Lesser awakening realizes that all phenomena are non-self; when sphere and cognition are provisionally combined in function, birth-and-death can be eliminated. Discerning their combined function is taking refuge in the Saṃgha. Refuge speaks of the beginning of practice; here its end is clarified: in the end, achieving the exhaustion of suffering is named vimokṣa.

14.25

Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha: "World-Honoured One... [up to] ...it is not what can be known by śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas."

14.26

Sengliang states: Nirvāṇa is one phenomenon that possesses both. Both statements correspond to the reality. That Buddha, Dharma, and Saṃgha are eternal means that eternity is nirvāṇa. The name 'eternal' is one, yet the three items are nirvāṇa. Sengzong states: As for the differences among the three refuges, one should know that nirvāṇa seems not to be of one substance; this is meant to have the Tathāgata explain and reconcile how the three refuges are one in substance yet different in meaning. Because sentient beings fear birth-and-death, the Buddha explained the three names for them, but not in order to distinguish their substance. That there are phenomena with one name and different meanings further clarifies and explains why the three names could be established. Now, the establishment of names and meanings naturally has many paths: just as Buddha, Dharma, and Saṃgha being eternal is one name, yet the three meanings are different. 'Buddha' takes awakening as its meaning. That the Dharma is called non-awakening means that Dharma takes standard as its meaning, not the meaning of awakening. Nirvāṇa being named vimokṣa means being free from encumbrance; it naturally has its own explanatory meaning. Vimokṣa now is explained by overturning that meaning. Space being called non-wholesome means neither wholesome nor unwholesome; this proves that names and meanings are both different. When I formerly told Vyāsa, it was cited to prove that the names and meanings of the three refuges should not be identical. In terms of the Dharma and Saṃgha of distinct substances, both their substance and meaning are different. Now, regarding the Buddha, although his substance is one, following the meanings it becomes three; one cannot, because the substance is one, cause the meanings not to be three; nor by saying the meanings are three wish to cause the substance to be separate. Explaining one as three is establishing transformation according to the situation, with different expositions of the Dharma. The three refuges are also like this.

14.27

Kāśyapa spoke again: "As the Buddha has spoken... [up to] ...true vimokṣa is the Tathāgata."

14.28

Sengliang states: The accumulation of arising and perishing is named 'body'. Distinguishing suffering and bliss is named 'cognition'. Nirvāṇa lacks these; hence it is called 'relinquishing'. As for 'who experiences ease and bliss?', above various forms of bliss were spoken of, clarifying that it is not experiencing bliss, hence the question is raised. As for 'the body attains ease and bliss', having food, having a body, and having consciousness make distinctions—this is named 'suffering'. Having no food, having no body, and not generating distinctions—this is named 'bliss'. As for 'there is no experiencer of bliss', the principle of non-experiencing is complete and round; it cannot be analogized with worldly things. The various metaphors here are all partial. Sengzong states: Feeling stifled after eating: when at the stage of practice, being greedy for the five desires is compared to eating; being obscured by delusion is like feeling mentally stifled. Going outside wishing to vomit: setting the mind on leaving suffering is spoken of as going out. Wishing to eliminate afflictions, returning after vomiting: cultivating the path and cutting off fetters, having attained the result of success, bending down to enter birth-and-death is compared to returning. A companion asking: like Kāśyapa's present question. Saying 'recovered': the Tathāgata explains the supreme subtlety of the stage of fruition. This clearly distinguishes that the past statement of 'relinquishing the body and relinquishing cognition' was provisional and not ultimate.

14.29

Kāśyapa spoke again: "Neither arising nor perishing... [up to] ...the nature of the Tathāgata is vimokṣa."

14.30

Huilang states: Because Kāśyapa was explaining vimokṣa, there was this sentence; hence taking it as a difficulty, he requested an explanation again.

14.31

The Buddha told Kāśyapa: "Good son, this is not so... [up to] ...cannot be compared to the sound of crows and magpies."

14.32

Sengliang states: Using a bird to analogize a bird, and using a sound to analogize a sound—if taken entirely as the same bird, they cannot be compared; if taken partially, it can analogize the Buddha's voice.

14.33

At that time, the Buddha praised Kāśyapa: "Excellent, excellent!... [up to] ...know that the nature of all phenomena is also like this."

14.34

Sengliang states: 'Due to this cause and condition' means a partial cause and condition. 'None can equal' means it is not a complete metaphor. Being an analogy is partial.

14.35

Kāśyapa spoke again: "Why is the Tathāgata... [up to] ...because accomplishment is complete, it is named mahāparinirvāṇa."

14.36

Sengliang states: The ordinary and the noble cannot be compared to each other; if taken partially, the ordinary may be borrowed to clarify the noble. 'Although not complete': of the deadly sins (ānantarya) there are two kinds: first, merely having a severe mind is incomplete; second, having both a severe mind and a severe act is complete.

Linked texts (1)

大般涅槃經集解 — Classical Chinese