[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) › [涅槃玄義發源機要](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1766) › 1.15 # 涅槃玄義發源機要 1.15 涅槃玄義發源機要 1.15 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.15.1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1766.1.15.1) 二、「金剛」下，略序餘四。 然釋名總論三法體宗用，別論三法。 總既含別、別不離總，故體即是大，宗即是度，用即是滅，教相分別總別之三法耳，是故五章不出三法。 金剛寶藏等者，二十一經云「譬如寶藏，多諸珍異種種具足。 佛道甚深奧藏亦復如是，多諸奇異具足無缺，名大涅槃。 」二邊不壞故曰金剛，含攝三千故名寶藏，無二死遷變故曰恒安，無三惑熱惱故曰清涼，不老不死即常住不變也。 置毒佛性者，毒喻佛性，五味喻五道。 二十七經云「譬如有人置毒乳中，乃至醍醐皆悉有毒。 名字雖變毒性不失，若服醍醐亦能殺人。 眾生佛性亦爾，雖處五道受別異身，而是佛性常一無變。 」應以見性破惑名為殺人，即是今經大力用也。 前引置毒喻五時教，此引置毒喻五道機同，引一文而用意各別。 毒鼓，如第九經「譬如有人以新毒塗鼓，於眾人中擊。 雖無心欲聞，聞之皆死，唯除不橫死者。 是經亦爾，於諸行眾中有聞聲者，所有三毒悉皆滅盡。 雖無心思念，是經力故，能滅煩惱犯重造逆，聞已亦作菩提因緣漸斷煩惱，除不橫死一闡提輩。 」八自在我者，一、一多。 示一身以為多身，身數大小如微塵充滿十方。 如來身實非塵，以自在故現微塵身。 二、大小。 示一塵身滿大千界。 三、輕重。 以滿大千之身輕舉飛空，實無輕重。 四、色心。 如來一心安住不動，所可示化無量形類。 五、根。 六根互用。 六、得。 得一切法，亦無得想。 七、說。 演一偈，經無量劫，義亦不盡。 八、見。 如來遍滿一切處，如虛空不可得見，具如第二十一經。 常住二字者，〈壽命品〉云「常當繫心修此二字，佛是常住。 若有修此二字，當知是人隨我所行、至我至處。 」〈四諦品〉云「或聞常住二字音聲，若一經耳，即生天上。 」無上醍醐者，即經云「從熟酥出醍醐，如從《摩訶般若》出《大涅槃》」也。 二、「名含」下，結。 極教之相也者，聖人被下之言曰教，分別同異曰相。 謂分別今經三德圓融，異偏小縱橫也。 又望前諸部，明圓雖同，兼等則異。 今雖重施，同知佛性，故與兼等，其義永殊。 天竺五處不同者，五國咸名天竺，而言音各異。 天竺或言身毒、或言賢豆，皆訛也。 正言印度，印度月名，月有千名，斯一稱也。 良以彼土賢聖相繼，開悟群生照臨如月，因以名也。 奢切小殊者，謂言音大同，但奢緩親切小異。 如中國云摩訶，東南稱摩醯也。 此間楚夏者，此則言音大異，如中國云般涅，西北稱涅隷。 淮南曰楚，中原曰夏，楚即蠻夷也。 中原語正，類彼中天； 淮楚語訛，類彼西北。 《春秋後語》曰「楚之先季連苗裔曰鬻熊，其子事周文王，早卒。 子熊任，任生熊繹，成王舉文武之勤，而封於楚蠻也。 」孔安國曰：「大國曰夏。 」雙卷者，自有二經：一在王舍城鷂山中說，名佛般泥洹經，上下兩卷，即西晉帛法祖譯。 一在毘舍離國大林中重閣講堂說，名大般涅槃經，亦上下兩卷，即東晉釋法顯譯。 而此二本皆是小乘。 六卷名大般泥洹經，亦法顯所譯。 大本即無讖所翻六卷，乃是大本前分耳。 是義下，斥古非也。 肇論下，彼《涅槃無名論》云「泥洹、泥曰、涅槃，此三名前後異出，蓋是楚夏不同耳，涅槃者正也。 」故今云為彼土正音。 「如言大者」下，以此方大含多義，以例涅槃不偏翻。 一切至於此者，此即涅槃。 《大品》云「一切法中涅槃為第一。 」「又大」下，〈名字功德品〉云「所言大者，名之為常。 」神通者，《瓔珞經》云「神名天心，通名慧性。 」天心慧性究竟開發，名之為大，故曰極號。 「常樂」下，總包四德故名為大，故曰都名。 故不可翻也者，以涅槃多含，故存梵語。 是色聲之法者，手書故屬色，口說故屬聲。 「不可」下，累書是色，疊說是聲。 意云：既書梵名，不可更書華名也。 > Second, from 'Vajra' onward, briefly outlining the remaining four \[headings\]. Now, the explanation of the title discusses the three dharmas generally, while essence, principle, and function discuss the three dharmas specifically. Since the general contains the specific and the specific is not separate from the general, the essence is precisely 'great', the principle is precisely 'crossing over', the function is precisely 'cessation', and the characteristics of the teaching merely differentiate the three dharmas of the general and the specific. Therefore, the five headings do not go beyond the three dharmas. Regarding 'vajra jewel treasury' and so forth: Fascicle 21 of the sūtra says, 'For example, like a jewel treasury, abundant in various rare and extraordinary treasures, complete with every kind. The profoundly deep and secret treasury of the Buddha path is also like this: abundant in rare marvels, complete and without lack, it is called the Great Nirvāṇa.' Indestructible by the two extremes, it is called 'vajra'; containing and gathering the three thousand \[realms\], it is called a 'jewel treasury'; free from the vicissitudes of the two kinds of death, it is called 'ever-peaceful'; free from the burning afflictions of the three delusions, it is called 'pure and cool'; free from old age and death, it is permanent and unchanging. Regarding 'poison placed in Buddha-nature': poison exemplifies Buddha-nature, and the five flavors exemplify the five destinies. Fascicle 27 of the sūtra says, 'For example, if someone places poison in milk, all the way to sarpirmanda it will contain poison. Though the name changes, the nature of the poison is not lost; if one consumes the sarpirmanda, it can also kill people. The Buddha-nature of sentient beings is also like this: though existing in the five destinies and receiving distinct bodies, this Buddha-nature is always one and unchanging.' Taking the perception of nature and destruction of delusions as 'killing people' is precisely the great power and function of this sūtra. The earlier citation of placing poison exemplified the five periods of teaching, while this citation of placing poison exemplifies the identity of capacity across the five destinies; citing a single passage, the intentions are distinct. Regarding the 'poison-smeared drum', as in Fascicle 9: 'For example, if someone smears a drum with fresh poison and strikes it in the midst of a crowd, though they have no wish to hear it, all who hear it die, excepting only those who do not die an untimely death. This sūtra is also like this: among assemblies of practitioners, if there are those who hear its sound, all their three poisons are completely extinguished. Though they have no deliberate thought, through the power of this sūtra it can eliminate afflictions, grave offenses, and the unpardonable acts; upon hearing it, it also serves as a cause and condition for bodhi, gradually severing afflictions, excepting only those who do not die an untimely death, the icchantikas.' Regarding the 'eight kinds of sovereign self': First, one and many: manifesting a single body as many bodies, the number and size of the bodies filling the ten directions like fine dust motes. The Tathāgata's body is truly not dust motes, yet through sovereignty he manifests a body of dust motes. Second, large and small: manifesting a body the size of a single dust mote that fills a great thousand worlds. Third, light and heavy: with a body that fills a great thousand worlds, rising lightly and flying into the air, truly having neither lightness nor heavigth. Fourth, form and mind: the Tathāgata's single mind abides unmoving, while the beings he can manifest and convert are of immeasurable forms and classes. Fifth, sense faculties: the six sense faculties function interchangeably. Sixth, attainment: attaining all dharmas without any notion of attainment. Seventh, expounding: expounding a single gāthā throughout immeasurable kalpas, its meaning is never exhausted. Eighth, visibility: the Tathāgata permeates all places, like empty space, unable to be seen—all fully detailed as in Fascicle 21. Regarding the two words 'permanently abiding': the 'Chapter on Longevity' states, 'One should constantly bind one's mind to cultivating these two words: "The Buddha is permanently abiding." If anyone cultivates these two words, you should know that this person follows where I go and reaches where I reach.' The 'Chapter on the Four Truths' states, 'If one hears the sound of the two words "permanently abiding", once it passes through the ear, one is reborn in heaven.' The 'unsurpassed sarpirmanda' is as the sūtra says: 'From clarified butter comes sarpirmanda, just as from \*Mahāprajñā\* comes the \*Mahānirvāṇa\*.' Second, from 'The title contains' onward, conclusion. 'Characteristics of the ultimate teaching': the words of the sage bestowed on those below are called 'teaching', and distinguishing similarities and differences is called 'characteristics'. This means distinguishing the round harmony of the three virtues in the present sūtra from the horizontal and vertical arrangements of the partial and small. Furthermore, looking back at the preceding texts, while their explanation of the perfect is the same, they differ in combining it with \[the other teachings\] and so on. Now, although it is re-bestowed, all equally realize Buddha-nature, and therefore it is completely distinct from those that combine \[the other teachings\]. 'The differences among the five regions of India': all five kingdoms are named India, but their spoken sounds differ. India is sometimes called Shendu or Xiandou, which are both erroneous. The correct term is Yindu; Yindu is a name for the moon. The moon has a thousand names, and this is one designation. This is truly because in that land sages and worthies appeared in succession, awakening the multitudes of living beings and shining upon them like the moon; hence it was so named. 'A slight difference in slackness and sharpness': this means that the sounds are broadly the same, differing only slightly in being slack or sharp. For instance, in the Central Kingdom one says \*mahā\*, while in the southeast they call it \*mahe\*. 'The differences between Chu and Xia here': here the sounds differ greatly, as when the Central Kingdom says \*bannie\*, while the northwest says \*nieli\*. South of the Huai is called Chu, and the Central Plains is called Xia; Chu refers to the barbarians. The language of the Central Plains is correct, akin to Central India; the language of Huai-Chu is erroneous, akin to the northwest. The \*Chunqiu houyu\* says: 'The ancestor of Chu was Yuxiong, a descendant of Jilian; his son served King Wen of Zhou and died early. His son was Xiongren, and Xiongren fathered Xiongyi; King Cheng, promoting the merits of Kings Wen and Wu, enfeoffed him among the barbarians of Chu.' Kong Anguo said: 'A great state is called Xia.' Regarding the 'two-fascicle versions', there are naturally two sūtras: one was expounded on Vulture Peak in Rājagṛha, titled the \*Fo bannihuan jing\*, in two fascicles, upper and lower, translated by Bo Fazu under the Western Jin. The other was expounded in the multi-storied lecture hall in the Great Forest of Vaiśālī, titled the \*Da banniepan jing\*, also in two fascicles, upper and lower, translated by the monk Faxian under the Eastern Jin. Yet both of these texts belong to the Hinayana. The six-fascicle version is titled the \*Da bannihuan jing\*, also translated by Faxian. The 'large text' is the translation by Dharmakṣema; the six fascicles are merely the earlier portion of the large text. From 'This meaning' onward, refuting ancient errors. From 'The treatise of Sengzhao' onward: his \*Nirvāṇa is Nameless Treatise\* says, 'Nihuan, niyue, and niepan—these three names appeared at different times, which is merely a difference between Chu and Xia; niepan is the correct one.' Therefore it is now said to be the correct pronunciation of that land. From 'Just as the word "great"' onward: using the fact that 'great' in this region contains many meanings to illustrate that nirvāṇa should not be translated one-sidedly. 'All arrive at this' refers to nirvāṇa. The \*Dapin\* says, 'Among all dharmas, nirvāṇa is foremost.' From 'Furthermore, great' onward: the 'Chapter on the Merits of the Name' says, 'What is called "great" is named permanent.' As for 'spiritual penetrations', the \*Yingluo jing\* says: '"Spiritual" is named heavenly mind; "penetration" is named the nature of wisdom.' When heavenly mind and the nature of wisdom are fully developed, it is called 'great'; hence it is called the 'ultimate designation'. From 'Permanence and bliss' onward: because it generally encompasses the four virtues, it is called 'great'; hence it is called the 'collective name'. 'Therefore it cannot be translated': because nirvāṇa contains many meanings, the Sanskrit word is preserved. 'Belongs to form and sound': handwritten, it belongs to form; spoken aloud, it belongs to sound. From 'Cannot' onward: writing repeatedly is form; speaking repetitively is sound. The meaning is: once the Sanskrit name is written, one should not write the Chinese name again. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) ### [1.15.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1766.1.15.2) 又一梵名具含多義，不可累說，由是不翻。 義豈可多者，此師不許一名含多義也。 「但一」下，正示己義，還引此方息字為例。 問：多訓與多義，豈不同耶？ 答：不同。 如訓子息時，但有子息一義，故子息名下更無多義。 此皆人師情見如此，蓋匪通方。 或訓長息者，以生長訓息也。 暫時消息者，此以調養為消息。 報示消息者，此以音信為消息。 一名四實者，先陀婆一名，而有鹽器水馬之四實。 智臣善解者，〈菩薩品〉云「如是四物共同一名，有智之臣善知此名。 若王洗時索先陀婆即便奉水，若王食時索先陀婆即便奉鹽，欲飲奉器，欲行奉馬。 」經喻如來密語，唯大乘智臣應當善知。 四等者，謂慈悲喜捨也。 亦曰四無量，無量從境，四等從心。 境雖無量，我心常等。 以輕代重者，以智慧翻般若也。 真丹者，或云震旦、旃丹、指那、指難，皆梵音賖切也。 若準《華嚴》，翻為漢地。 又《婆沙論》中有二音：一云指那，此云文物國，即讚美此方是衣冠文物之地也。 二云指難，此云邊鄙，即貶挫此方非中國也。 《西域記》翻摩訶支那為大漢國。 或謂日出東隅其色如丹。 故云震旦、真丹者，此皆訛也。 竺道生者，竺姓也，道生名也。 本姓魏，鉅鹿人，幼而穎悟，聰哲若神。 後值沙門竺法汰，遂改俗受業，因姓竺也。 言涅槃聖者，初生遊長安，從羅什請法，關中僧眾咸謂神悟。 後還建康住青園寺，寺即晉恭思皇后褚氏種青之處，因以為名。 以六卷泥洹先至京都，生剖析經理洞入幽微，乃說闡提皆得成佛，遂撰十四科。 其第十眾生有佛性義云「經言闡提無者，欲擊勵惡行之人，非實無也。 」以其見惡明無、無惡必有，抑揚當時。 誘物之妙，豈可守文哉。 于時大本未傳，孤明先發，獨見忤眾。 於是舊學以為邪說譏憤滋甚，遂顯大眾擯而遣之。 生於大眾中正容誓曰：「若我所說反於經義者，請於現身即表癘疾。 若與實相不相違背者，願捨壽之時踞師子座。 」言竟拂衣而遊。 初投吳虎丘山，旬日之中學徒數百。 其年夏雷震青園佛殿，龍升于天，光影西壁，因改寺名龍光。 時人嘆曰：「龍既去已，生必行矣。 」俄而投迹廬山，銷影巖岫之中，僧眾咸共敬服。 後涅槃大本至于南京，果稱闡提悉有佛性，與前所說合若符契。 既獲斯經，尋即講說，以宋元嘉十一年冬十一月庚子，於廬山精舍升于法座，神色開明德音俊發。 論議數番窮理盡妙，觀聽之眾莫不悟悅。 法席將畢，忽見麈尾紛然而墜，端坐正容隱几而卒，顏色不異似若入定。 於是京邑諸僧內慚自疾，追而信伏。 其人鑒之至，徵瑞如此。 甞著《涅槃記》，事跡委如梁傳第九。 其於涅槃獨見若此，故時人美之為聖。 「引」下，文引唱滅速滅，即是譯人翻涅槃為滅也。 「前家」下，今師判也。 前謂生公，後指莊嚴唱滅速滅，但約生身，故云止滅。 於生復滅滅者，亦滅涅槃也。 二邊俱滅，故稱寂滅。 白馬引第二文，長干引第十五文，定林引第五文。 瘡疣，即二死也。 梁武引二十三文，因中用智名斷，果上惑盡名不生。 「叡師」下，叡公釋論序也。 秦言者，秦有亡秦、符秦、姚秦、乞伏秦，今云秦者姚秦，亦曰德秦，以符秦為前秦也。 叡乃什公門人，即姚秦時也。 方冊者，即此土經籍也。 《禮記．中庸篇》曰「文武之政布在方冊」，鄭玄注云「方，版； 策，簡也。 」或曰：一扎曰簡，連編諸簡曰冊。 故《左傳．序》曰「大事書之於冊，小事簡牘而已。 」梵音不可變者，謂不可翻也。 唐三藏明不可翻，凡有五例：一祕密，如陀羅尼。 二多含，如薄伽梵。 三此方無，如閻浮樹。 四順古，如阿耨菩提。 五生善，如般若。 今涅槃不翻，應在生善、多含之例。 即時書之者，即，就也。 匠者，謂師，謂什公也。 受者，謂資，謂筆受之人也。 謹，敬也。 > Furthermore, a single Sanskrit word contains multiple meanings that cannot be expressed repeatedly, and for this reason it is left untranslated. Regarding "How could there be multiple meanings?": this master does not allow a single word to contain multiple meanings. From "Merely one" below, he directly shows his own meaning, turning back to quote the Chinese character \*xi\* (息) as an analogy. Question: How are multiple glosses and multiple meanings not the same? Answer: They are not the same. For instance, when glossing \*zixi\* (子息, offspring), there is only the single meaning of offspring; hence under the word \*zixi\* there are no longer multiple meanings. These are all subjective opinions of human teachers and do not grasp the overarching principle. Some gloss it as \*zhangxi\* (長息, growth/extension), glossing \*xi\* in the sense of production and growth. In the case of \*zhanshi xiaoxi\* (暫時消息, temporary recuperation), here it takes recuperation/nourishment as \*xiaoxi\*. In the case of \*baoshi xiaoxi\* (報示消息, reporting news), here it takes news/correspondence as \*xiaoxi\*. Regarding "One name with four referents": \*saindhava\* is a single name, yet it has the four referents of salt, vessel, water, and horse. Regarding "A wise minister understands well": the "Bodhisattva Chapter" says: "Such four things share a single name; a wise minister understands this name well. If the king, when washing, asks for \*saindhava\*, he immediately offers water; if the king, when eating, asks for \*saindhava\*, he immediately offers salt; when wishing to drink, he offers a vessel; when wishing to travel, he offers a horse." The sūtra uses this as an analogy for the Tathāgata's esoteric words: only a wise minister of the Great Vehicle should understand them well. The "four equals" refer to loving-kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity. They are also called the four immeasurables; "immeasurable" derives from the objective sphere, while "four equals" derives from the mind. Although the objective sphere is immeasurable, my mind is constantly equal. Regarding "Replacing the weighty with the light": this is translating \*prajñā\* as "wisdom" (智慧). Regarding \*Zhendan\* (真丹): it is alternatively called \*Zhendan\* (震旦), \*Zhandan\* (旃丹), \*Zhina\* (指那), or \*Zhinan\* (指難); these are all loose phonetic transcriptions of the Sanskrit sound. According to the \*Avataṃsaka-sūtra\*, it is translated as "the land of the Han." Furthermore, in the \*Vibhāṣā-śāstra\* there are two phonetic renderings: one is \*Zhina\*, translated here as "land of culture and institutions" (文物國), which praises this region as a place of robes, caps, culture, and institutions; the second is \*Zhinan\*, translated here as "border hinterland" (邊鄙), which depreciates this region as not being the Central Kingdom. The \*Records of the Western Regions\* translates \*Mahācīna\* as "Great Han Country." Some claim that because the sun rises in the eastern quarter and its color is like cinnabar (丹), it is called \*Zhendan\* (震旦 or 真丹); these are all erroneous. Regarding Zhu Daosheng: Zhu was his surname and Daosheng was his personal name. His original surname was Wei, and he was a native of Julu. From his youth he was sharp and perceptive, brilliant and discerning as if divine. Later he met the śramaṇa Zhu Fatai, whereupon he abandoned secular life and received instruction, adopting the surname Zhu accordingly. Regarding the "Sage of Nirvāṇa": at first Daosheng traveled to Chang'an and requested the Dharma from Kumārajīva; the saṃgha in Guanzhong all regarded him as having divine comprehension. Later he returned to Jiankang and resided at Qingyuan Temple; this temple was where Empress Gongsitu of the Jin, née Chu, planted greenery, and it was named after this. Because the six-fascicle \*Nirvāṇa Sūtra\* arrived first in the capital, Daosheng analyzed the principles of the sūtra and penetrated deeply into their subtleties; he then asserted that even icchantikas can all attain Buddhahood, and subsequently composed fourteen topics. His tenth topic, "The Meaning of Sentient Beings Possessing Buddha-Nature," stated: "When the sūtra says that icchantikas lack it, this was intended to stimulate and encourage people of evil deeds; it is not that they truly lack it." Because he saw that evil deeds clarify absence, and without evil deeds there must be presence, this was an encouragement and moderation for that time. How could such wondrous guidance of beings be bound by literal words? At that time the full version had not yet been transmitted; this solitary illumination emerged first, and his single insight clashed with the multitude. Thereupon the scholars of the old learning regarded it as heterodox teaching, and their mockery and indignation grew increasingly severe; they eventually assembled the great assembly and expelled him. Facing the great assembly with a composed expression, Daosheng made a vow: "If what I have spoken goes against the meaning of the sūtras, I pray that in this present life I may manifest a pestilential disease; if it does not contradict the true mark, may I sit upon the lion seat at the time of relinquishing my lifespan!" Having spoken, he shook his robes and departed. He first went to Mount Huqiu in Wu; within ten days he had several hundred disciples. In the summer of that year, thunder struck the Buddha hall of Qingyuan Temple, a dragon ascended into the sky, and its light cast a shadow upon the western wall; therefore the temple's name was changed to Longguang. People of the time sighed and said: "Now that the dragon has gone, Daosheng will surely depart." Soon after, he retired to Mount Lu, concealing his shadow among the cliffs and peaks; the saṃgha all revered and submitted to him. Later, when the full text of the \*Nirvāṇa Sūtra\* arrived in the Southern Capital, it indeed stated that icchantikas all possess Buddha-nature, matching what he had previously spoken like two halves of a tally. Once he obtained this sūtra, he immediately lectured on it. On the \*gengzi\* day of the eleventh month in winter of the eleventh year of the Yuanjia era of the Song dynasty, he ascended the Dharma seat in the Mount Lu monastery; his demeanor was bright and clear, and his virtuous voice burst forth brilliantly. Through several rounds of debate, he exhausted the principles and penetrated the subtleties; none among the audience failed to be enlightened and delighted. As the Dharma session was drawing to a close, his deer-tail flywhisk was suddenly seen to fall; he sat upright with a dignified countenance, leaned against his armrest, and passed away, his complexion unchanged, appearing as if entering meditative absorption. Thereupon the monks of the capital felt inwardly ashamed and self-condemned, subsequently believing and submitting. Such was the utmost depth of his insight, and such were the auspicious signs. He once authored the \*Notes on Nirvāṇa\*; the details of his career are fully recorded in the ninth fascicle of the \*Liang Biographies of Eminent Monks\*. His solitary insight into nirvāṇa being such, people of the time praised him as a sage. From "Quoting" below, the text quotes "announcing extinction and swift extinction"; this refers to the translator rendering \*nirvāṇa\* as "extinction." From "The former master" below, our present master passes judgment. "The former" refers to Venerable Daosheng, while "the latter" indicates \[the master of\] Zhuangyan \[Temple\]. Announcing extinction and swift extinction only pertain to the physical body of birth; hence he says "merely extinction." "Extinguishing extinction upon birth" means also extinguishing nirvāṇa. Both extremes are extinguished, and so it is called quiescence. Baima Temple quotes the second text, Changgan Temple quotes the fifteenth text, and Dinglin Temple quotes the fifth text. Ulcers and warts refer to the two kinds of death. Emperor Wu of the Liang dynasty quotes the twenty-third text: employing wisdom in the cause is called cutting off, while the exhaustion of delusions in the fruition is called non-arising. From "Master Rui" below, this is Master Sengrui's preface to the commentary. "The speech of Qin": among Qin dynasties, there were the Former Qin of the Zhou, the Former Qin of Fu, the Later Qin of Yao, and the Western Qin of Qifu; what is now called Qin is the Yao Qin, also called Virtuous Qin, with Fu Qin considered the Former Qin. Sengrui was a disciple of Kumārajīva, which was during the Yao Qin period. "Wooden boards and bamboo tablets" refer to the classical texts of this land. The "Doctrine of the Mean" in the \*Book of Rites\* states: "The governance of Kings Wen and Wu is set forth on wooden boards and bamboo tablets." Zheng Xuan's commentary states: "\*Fang\* are wooden boards; \*ce\* are bamboo tablets." Some say: a single slip is called a tablet (\*jian\*), and multiple tablets strung together are called a bound volume (\*ce\*). Therefore the preface to the \*Zuo tradition\* states: "Major affairs were written on bound volumes; minor affairs on bamboo and wooden tablets." "Sanskrit sounds cannot be changed" means that they cannot be translated. The Tripiṭaka Master of the Tang explained untranslatability as having five categories: first, the esoteric, such as dhāraṇīs; second, multiple meanings, such as \*bhagavat\*; third, non-existence in this region, such as the jambu tree; fourth, following antiquity, such as \*anuttara-bodhi\*; fifth, giving rise to goodness, such as \*prajñā\*. Now \*nirvāṇa\* being left untranslated should fall under the categories of giving rise to goodness and containing multiple meanings. Regarding "Written down at that time": \*ji\* (即) means "taking up/proceeding to." The "master" (匠) refers to the teacher, meaning Kumārajīva. The "receiver" (受) refers to the disciple, meaning the person who took down the dictation. "Respectful" (謹) means reverent. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) ### [1.15.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1766.1.15.3) 「四云」下，約所詮之理不可思議故，雙非華梵。 又理難思，故不可翻。 而摩訶亦可翻大，故非不可翻。 「滅據」下，法即五陰，人即假名。 「生死」下，滅生死妄法，證涅槃真法。 轉凡夫因人為極聖果人，以轉釋度義也。 滅名目無者，目謂題目，以滅名題目其無，以度名題目其有也。 實法即第一義諦，假人五陰俱不可得，故云俱滅。 相續即世諦，從因至果、革凡成聖，故云俱度。 「三云」下，苦依身在名有餘，身智俱滅名無餘。 而非永免者，謂死已還生，故但名滅。 佛於三界更不受生，方得名度。 「觀師」下，難開善初解也。 生死之人附何而度者，且人之與法豈得相離，由五陰實法有眾生假人，如攬指成拳，故無異體。 其法既已先滅，其人附何而度？ 此難彼釋滅義也。 「若生」下，人既可轉，例知法亦可轉，以人法無異體故，何得云生死法滅耶？ 此難彼釋度義也。 「今研」下，今師以四教望之，次第破彼四解。 三果生死未併滅者，初果雖滅四趣生死，而有欲界人天七生，二果尚有一生； 三果雖無欲界生死，尚有色無色生死，故前三果未併滅也。 「凡法」下，約有餘解脫難。 子縛已斷名因滅，苦依身在名果未滅。 「若灰」下，約無餘難假法俱寂者，謂假人實法也。 寂則不論度者，人既寂滅，約誰論度？ 「又不」下，小教所談二乘取證無餘，無作佛義。 凡法都不滅等者，以三藏菩薩不斷惑，故不論滅與不滅。 度與不度者，以本自不生今則無滅，若法若人俱如幻化故。 「非但」下，滅偽法在十住，滅真法在十行。 滅偽法故度凡人，滅涅槃故度聖人。 言不涉真法者，彼釋滅但云生死之法滅。 「語不」下，釋度但云生死之人轉，故云不涉真、不論聖也。 滅之與度不縱不橫者，滅即三解脫、度即三般若，而體同名異，三一相即不縱不橫。 「既非」下，小即三藏、共即通教、菩薩別教、佛即圓教，先聖法言唯茲四教。 彼既並非，故不敢道。 受此有無猶是苦等者，領受二見故逼迫為苦，執此起惑故成集，修行對治故是道，斷常俱離故是滅。 此斥開善有無之義全同斷常。 言猶是滅諦者，謂縱滅斷常未出三藏小乘，意未涉大，故云猶是。 「滅諦之真」下，開善所說尚非小乘滅義，云何釋今圓頓涅槃？ 若以至目有者，牒義。 「若雙」下，按定雙目。 生死者，謂以滅度俱約生死以說也。 「生死本自」下，正難。 則無度法等者，實法既無，假人亦無，故云亦無度者。 「既不可」下，以生死本空如幻化故。 「云何」下，生死尚不可，何況涅槃耶？ 疣贅者，上音尤，下之汭切。 《說文》曰「疣，贅也。 小曰疣，大曰贅。 」《釋名》云「疣者，丘也。 出於皮上，如地有丘。 」今以滅度之義如彼疣贅，通真之理喻之虛空。 「若以」下，約別教破。 且以初地中道為涅槃。 文中先邪、次小，約二邊次第縱破也。 縱非邪執乃是小義，縱非小義乃是教道，二邊定非中道。 涅槃以名召法等者，以滅度名召有無法，以有無法應滅度名。 名物尚存者，物即法也。 能通拙者，且據三藏二乘為破析色故拙。 所通偽者，所證偏真，非是真實故。 貧住化城者，乏大乘財食，猶如貧子止住草菴。 患佛道長遠，譬之疲商權息化城。 《法華》開顯，破草菴之滯情、蕩化城之執教，故云久已被棄。 「云何」下，安用《法華》已棄之義，用釋今經圓常之名。 偏邪二邊者，望當教但中理，故二邊悉是偏邪。 有不關無等者，有無不融故非圓義。 縱橫狼籍者，各體故縱，並得故橫。 劫掠下，掠，力尚反，奪取也。 經喻外道竊佛常樂之名，喻以劫牛。 今斥開善但得滅度之名，如掠劫群牛。 不知其義，如不解鑽搖。 三藏酪漿尚猶難得，況通別二酥、圓醍醐耶。 又滅度無明亦非究竟者，以破無明通分真故。 滅度究竟者，破惑究竟唯妙覺故。 > From "The fourth says" downward, it negates both Chinese and Sanskrit from the perspective of the unthinkability of the principle that is elucidated. Furthermore, because the principle is difficult to conceive, it cannot be translated. Yet, mahā can also be translated as "great"; hence, it is not the case that it cannot be translated. From "Extinction is based on" downward, the phenomenon (dharma) is the five aggregates, and the person is the nominal designation. From "Samsāra" downward, the false phenomena of samsāra are extinguished, and the true phenomena of nirvāṇa are realized. The causal person of an ordinary being is transformed into the fruitional person of the ultimate sage; this explains the meaning of "crossing over" through transformation. Extinction is a designation referring to nonexistence: "referring to" means a title or appellation; using the name "extinction" designates its nonexistence, while using the name "crossing over" designates its existence. Actual phenomena are the truth of the primary meaning; the provisional person and the five aggregates are both ungraspable, hence it is said that "both are extinguished." Continuity is the conventional truth; going from cause to fruit and transforming ordinary into sage, hence it is said that "both cross over." From "The third says" downward, the presence of the suffering-dependent body is called remainder; the extinction of both body and wisdom is called without remainder. That it is "not an eternal release" means that having died, one is born again, and so it is only called "extinction." Only when the Buddha no longer undergoes rebirth in the three realms is it entitled to be called "crossing over." From "Examining the master's" downward, it challenges the first explanation of Kaishan \[Zhizang\]. With regard to "on what does a person in samsāra rely to cross over?", can a person and phenomena ever be separated? It is due to the actual phenomena of the five aggregates that there is the nominal person of a sentient being, just as grasping the fingers forms a fist, so they do not have distinct substances. Since its phenomena are already extinguished first, on what does that person rely to cross over? This challenges his explanation of the meaning of extinction. From "If samsāra" downward, since the person can be transformed, by parallel we know that phenomena can also be transformed, because person and phenomena have no distinct substances. How then can one say that the phenomena of samsāra are extinguished? This challenges his explanation of the meaning of crossing over. From "Now examining" downward, our master \[Tiantai Zhizhe\], viewing it through the lens of the four teachings, refutes those four explanations in sequence. That the samsāra of the three fruitions is not completely extinguished means: although the first fruition has extinguished samsāra in the four evil destinies, there remain seven rebirths among humans and gods of the desire realm; the second fruition still has one rebirth; although the third fruition has no samsāra in the desire realm, it still has samsāra in the form and formless realms; therefore, the previous three fruitions have not completely extinguished it. From "Ordinary phenomena" downward, it challenges him from the perspective of liberation with remainder. The sub-entrenchments already severed is termed "causal extinction"; the presence of the suffering-dependent body is termed "fruitional non-extinction." From "If ash" downward, it challenges from the perspective of without remainder: "the provisional and phenomenal are both quiescent" refers to the nominal person and actual phenomena. If quiescent, one does not speak of crossing over: once the person is quiescent and extinguished, with reference to whom could one speak of crossing over? From "Furthermore, not" downward, what the lesser teaching discusses is that the two vehicles realize without remainder, and there is no meaning of becoming a Buddha. "Ordinary phenomena are not extinguished at all", etc.: because a tripiṭaka bodhisattva does not sever delusions, one does not discuss extinction or non-extinction. "Crossing over and not crossing over": because originally there is fundamentally no arising, now there is no extinction, for both phenomena and persons are like illusions. From "Not only" downward, extinguishing false phenomena is in the ten abodes; extinguishing true phenomena is in the ten practices. Because false phenomena are extinguished, ordinary persons cross over; because nirvāṇa is extinguished, sages cross over. Stating that it "does not touch upon true phenomena": his explanation of extinction merely says that the phenomena of samsāra are extinguished. From "The statement does not" downward: his explanation of crossing over merely says that the person of samsāra transforms; hence it is said that it does not touch upon the true and does not discuss sages. That extinction and crossing over are neither vertical nor horizontal means: extinction is the three liberations, and crossing over is the three prajñās, yet their substance is identical while their names differ; the three and the one are mutually identical, neither vertical nor horizontal. From "Since it is neither" downward: the "lesser" is the tripiṭaka; "shared" is the shared teaching; "bodhisattva" is the separate teaching; "Buddha" is the perfect teaching. The Dharma words of the ancient sages are confined only to these four teachings. Since he is none of these, he dares not speak. "Receiving these existence and nonexistence is still suffering", etc.: by accepting the two views, their affliction constitutes suffering; clinging to this produces delusion, constituting the origin; practicing the antidote constitutes the path; abandoning both annihilationism and eternalism constitutes cessation. This reprimands Kaishan's meaning of existence and nonexistence as being completely identical to annihilationism and eternalism. Saying "it is still the truth of cessation" means: even if annihilationism and eternalism are extinguished, it does not transcend the Hinayāna tripiṭaka; its intent has not yet touched upon the Mahāyāna, hence it says "it is still." From "The truth of the cessation truth" downward: what Kaishan states is not even the Hinayāna meaning of cessation; how could it explain the present perfect, sudden nirvāṇa? From "If to designate existence", it restates the meaning. From "If both", it holds fast to both designations. "Samsāra" means that both extinction and crossing over are explained in terms of samsāra. From "Samsāra is fundamentally" downward, it directly challenges. "Then there are no phenomena to cross over", etc.: since actual phenomena do not exist, the nominal person does not exist either; hence it says "there is also no one who crosses over." From "Since it cannot be" downward: because samsāra is fundamentally empty, like an illusion. From "How much less" downward: if even samsāra is inadmissible, how much more so nirvāṇa? "Wart and polyp (youzhui)": the upper character is pronounced yóu; the lower has the fanqie zhī-ruì. The Shuowen says: "A you is a zhui. A small one is called a you; a large one is called a zhui." The Shiming says: "A you is a mound. It emerges above the skin, just as the earth has mounds." Here, the meaning of extinction and crossing over is compared to that wart and polyp, while the principle of penetrating the true is compared to empty space. From "If using" downward, it refutes it in terms of the separate teaching, temporarily taking the Middle Way of the first stage as nirvāṇa. In the text, first comes the perverse, next the lesser, hypothetically refuting the two extremes in sequence. Even if it is not a perverse grasping, it is a lesser meaning; even if it is not a lesser meaning, it is \[merely\] the pedagogical path; the two extremes are definitively not the Middle Way. "Nirvāṇa uses the name to summon the phenomenon", etc.: the names of extinction and crossing over summon the phenomena of existence and nonexistence; the phenomena of existence and nonexistence correspond to the names of extinction and crossing over. "Names and objects still remain": "objects" means phenomena. "The means of access is clumsy": based for now on the tripiṭaka two vehicles, it is clumsy because of disintegrating and analyzing matter. "The access attained is false": what is realized is biased truth, not the real truth. "Poor, dwelling in the conjured city": lacking the wealth and provisions of the Mahāyāna, like a poor son staying in a straw hut; distressed by the vast distance of the Buddha Path, like exhausted merchants temporarily resting in the conjured city. The Lotus Sūtra's opening and revealing destroys the clinging sentiment toward the straw hut and clears away the dogmatic teachings of the conjured city; hence it is said to have "long been cast aside." From "How could" downward: how could one use a meaning already cast aside by the Lotus Sūtra to explain the name of the perfect and eternal of the present sūtra? "Biased and perverse, the two extremes": looking from the perspective of the "only-middle" principle of that teaching, the two extremes are entirely biased and perverse. "Existence is unrelated to nonexistence", etc.: because existence and nonexistence do not fuse, it is not the perfect meaning. "Vertically and horizontally scattered in disarray": because of distinct substances, they are vertical; because attained simultaneously, they are horizontal. From "Plunder" downward: "plunder (lüè)" has the fanqie lì-shàng, meaning to seize. The sūtra compares non-Buddhists stealing the Buddha's names of eternal and bliss to plundering cattle. Now it reprimands Kaishan for merely obtaining the names of extinction and crossing over, like plundering a herd of cattle, without understanding their meaning, like not understanding churning and shaking. Even the buttermilk of the tripiṭaka is difficult to obtain, let alone the curd and butter of the shared and separate, or the perfect ghee. Furthermore, extinguishing and crossing over ignorance is also not ultimate, because destroying ignorance applies generally to partial truth. "Extinguishing and crossing over is ultimate" because destroying delusions is ultimate only at sublime enlightenment. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) ### [1.15.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1766.1.15.4) 「方得」字上或有「滅度」二字者，文誤。 「以後」下，後謂妙覺，前謂分真。 第二第三者，文亦誤，應云第三第二也，第三約塵沙無明，第二約四住塵沙。 初番即有餘無餘尚不可。 以第四番中分破釋涅槃，況用第三第二，尚不可以第三第二，況用初番小乘義以釋圓頓極果涅槃耶？ 亦應凡夫從此至彼便應是度者，準前開善立義，乃云度者永免之名。 不云從此至彼，今此例難也。 既得以已有、還無釋滅，例應以凡夫死此生彼釋度也。 文中初難凡夫展轉複並，意云：既許是滅，即應是度； 若不是度，亦應非滅。 何得云滅通凡夫、度唯聖人耶？ 「若聖」下，次難聖人既許滅義同凡，例應度義亦同，故云聖人從此至彼等。 「若同」下，結難也。 若同小乘凡聖，則近同小果，非至圓極之高； 狹唯六道，非包十界之廣。 「若異」下，借使異小凡聖，但是通別，是故亦非高廣。 「云何」下，結斥。 應作四四十六番者，難第三第四解，亦應例前二解作四教難之，故有十六。 今文存略，前二解各約四教則成八，後二解各合為一，故但十番。 然後二解文雖但一，義各含四。 第三約有餘無餘及以三惑，則已該四教。 第四既約近狹非高廣以斥之，則高廣在圓。 近狹收三，義各含四，其旨煥若。 「明哲」下，示存略意。 哲，智也。 「時人」下，示研難意。 薳，音偉，遠也。 已如前說者，如前依開善翻名也。 > If above the characters "fang de (only then is it attained)" there are the two characters "mie du (extinction and crossing over)", it is a textual error. From "Taking the latter" downward: the "latter" refers to sublime enlightenment, and the "former" refers to partial truth. "The second and the third": this is also a textual error, and should read "the third and the second"; the third relates to dust-and-sand and ignorance, and the second relates to the four entrenchments and dust-and-sand. The first round, namely with and without remainder, is already inadmissible. If even the division into parts in the fourth round is inadmissible to explain nirvāṇa, how much less using the third and the second? If one cannot even use the third and the second, how much less using the Hinayāna meaning of the first round to explain the nirvāṇa of the ultimate fruit of the perfect and sudden? "It would also follow that an ordinary being going from here to there should just be crossing over": according to Kaishan's previous establishment of the doctrine, he said that crossing over is the name for eternal release. He did not say "going from here to there"; now this is challenged by analogy. Since he was able to explain extinction as having already existed and then returning to nonexistence, by analogy he should explain crossing over as an ordinary being dying here and being born there. In the text, he first challenges the cyclical repetition of ordinary beings; the meaning is: if you permit it to be extinction, then it should just be crossing over; if it is not crossing over, it should also not be extinction. How can one say that extinction applies generally to ordinary beings, while crossing over applies only to sages? From "If sages" downward, next he challenges: since the meaning of extinction for sages is admitted to be the same as for ordinary beings, by analogy the meaning of crossing over should also be the same; hence he says "a sage going from here to there", etc. From "If the same" downward is the concluding challenge. If it is the same as the Hinayāna ordinary beings and sages, then in proximity it is the same as the lesser fruit, not reaching the height of the perfect ultimate; in narrowness it is only the six destinies, not encompassing the breadth of the ten realms. From "If different" downward: even if it differs from the lesser ordinary beings and sages, it is merely the shared and separate, and therefore it is also not high and broad. From "How could" downward is the concluding reprimand. That "there should be four times four, or sixteen rounds": challenging the third and fourth explanations should also follow the example of the first two explanations by challenging them in terms of the four teachings, hence there would be sixteen. The present text is condensed: the first two explanations are each treated in terms of the four teachings, making eight, while the latter two explanations are each collapsed into one, hence there are only ten rounds. However, although the text for the latter two explanations is single, their meanings each contain the four. The third, in terms of with remainder, without remainder, and the three delusions, already encompasses the four teachings. Since the fourth reprimands it in terms of near and narrow rather than high and broad, high and broad lies in the perfect. Near and narrow gathers the three; their meanings each contain the four, and the import is resplendent. From "The discerning" downward indicates the intent behind condensing. "Discerning (zhe)" means wise. From "Contemporaries" downward indicates the intent behind investigating and challenging. "Wei (薳)" is pronounced wěi, meaning far. "As already stated previously": as stated previously regarding the translation of the name according to Kaishan. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1766~en-mt.1.15.1) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (3) - [一切經音義](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2128.26.145) — 慧琳, Classical Chinese - [大般涅槃經](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.sanskrit.mahayanasutra.mahaparinirvana-mahayana*zh-dharmaksema.23.28) — Classical Chinese - [維摩經略疏垂裕記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1779.2.169) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1766.1.15](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1766.1.15) · Pramāṇa