[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) › [大般涅槃經義記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1764) › 3.13 # 大般涅槃經義記 3.13 大般涅槃經義記 3.13 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [3.13](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1764.3.13) 佛答有三：一就三論一、二從「有法名一」已下就一辨三、三「如來或時說一為三、三為一」下雙就一三嘆以顯深。前中，初明「一切眾生以怖畏故求三歸依」，故有三別。以三歸故，證知佛性決定涅槃，所證同體，故得為一。第二段中，初先以理彰三是別，「是故我」下引說證別。前中，初先汎明諸法名義一異，當法施名唯有二門：一名義俱一、二名義俱異。法有體用、總別、同異，就體、就總、就同施名，名義俱一；就用、隨別、逐異施名，名義俱異。隱顯互論具有四句：一名義俱一。二名義俱異，備如向辨。三名一義異，就體、就總、就同施名，攝義從詮說為名一；隨用、隨別、隨異施名，攝詮從旨說為義異。四義一名異，翻前可知。今於四中且列兩門，「有法名一義異」是第三門、「有法名義俱異」是第二門。 > The Buddha's answer has three parts: first, discussing unity in terms of the three; second, from "there are dharmas whose names are one" onward, distinguishing the three in terms of unity; third, from "the Tathāgata sometimes speaks of the one as three and the three as one" onward, praising both the one and the three to show their profundity. In the first part, it first explains that "all sentient beings seek the three refuges out of fear," hence there is the distinction of three. Because of the three refuges, they realize and know the buddha-nature, the decisive, and nirvāṇa; because what is realized is of the same essence, they are able to be one. In the second section, it first manifests by principle that the three are distinct; from "therefore I" onward, it cites past teaching to prove their distinction. In the former part, it first broadly clarifies the unity and difference of names and meanings among all dharmas. In applying names to correspond to dharmas, there are only two approaches: first, name and meaning are both one; second, name and meaning are both different. Dharmas have essence and function, general and particular, identity and difference. Applying names in terms of essence, the general, and identity, name and meaning are both one; applying names in terms of function, following the particular, and pursuing difference, name and meaning are both different. Discussed mutually in terms of the hidden and manifest, there are four propositions: First, name and meaning are both one. Second, name and meaning are both different, fully as distinguished just now. Third, the name is one but the meanings are different: applying names in terms of essence, the general, and identity, subsuming meaning under the designation is called unity of name; applying names according to function, particularity, and difference, subsuming the designation under the intended meaning is called difference of meaning. Fourth, the meaning is one but the names are different, which can be known by reversing the previous one. Now, among the four, two approaches are presented for the moment: "there are dharmas whose names are one and meanings are different" is the third approach; "there are dharmas whose names and meanings are both different" is the second approach. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 3.12](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1764.3.12) - [Next: 3.14](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1764.3.14) - [Up: 3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1764.3) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1764~en-mt.3.13) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1764.3.13](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1764.3.13) · Pramāṇa