[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) › [大般涅槃經疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767) › 11.6 # 大般涅槃經疏 11.6 大般涅槃經疏 11.6 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [11.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.11.6) 廣答，文為二：先答形亂、次答聲亂。初云七百年者，正法千年，由度女人減五百年。六百七百，入像法時。《摩耶經》云「六百年馬鳴出，七百年龍樹出。」是時魔盛，即有四依。魔有有漏通，能變為四部四果及佛色像，猶如獵師外被袈裟內懷殺害。魔亦如是，外為聖像內挾邪謀。夫無漏在心不在於色，云何言作無漏之形？聖人有無漏威儀，亦是無漏五陰，故魔學之。從「是波旬當作是說」下，二是明聲亂。文為五：一亂佛身、二亂結戒、三亂佛德、四亂經律、五亂罪福。初亂佛身者，又四：一亂生，二亂行，三亂入廟，四亂納妃。初文者，若言實生是魔說，言不生生是佛說。次就行中亦應例爾。今不爾者，明不行是魔說，行是佛說。何者？魔邪常欲隱佛之德、顯佛之過，名亂佛行。入廟、納妃，皆如文。從「佛在舍衛」去，是亂結戒，如文。六十四能者，佛有三十二相，外道夸毘謂倍勝佛，故云有六十四能。又佛有三十二相并業，外道攀對求等，故立六十四能。三從「若有說言」去，是亂佛德。此中明佛不知好惡、不別冤親，刀割香塗悉不欣惡，如即人云刺眼不眴，此以癡意亂德。四從「若有說言如來為我」者，是亂經律。初通就經律作亂，後就常無常作亂，如文。五從「復有人言」去，是亂罪福。文為三番：初明正、次明邪、三更明正。初比丘自知非聖，答云非聖是則無犯。次從「復有說言無波羅夷」去，是邪。三從「若復說言於諸戒中」去，更明正。若過一法者，說戒時最初問清淨不，三唱不答，即犯妄語（云云）。一切眾生雖有佛性，要因持戒者，佛性是正因，持戒是因緣（云云）。 > In the broad answer, the text comprises two parts: first, answering the disturbance of form; next, answering the disturbance of voice. The initial mention of "seven hundred years" refers to the one thousand years of the true Dharma being reduced by five hundred years due to the ordination of women. The six-hundredth and seven-hundredth years mark the entry into the period of the semblance Dharma. The \*Māyā Sūtra\* states: "In the six-hundredth year Aśvaghoṣa appears; in the seven-hundredth year Nāgārjuna appears." At this time māra flourishes, so there are the four reliances. Māra possesses outflow-tainted supernatural penetrations and is able to transform into the four assemblies, the four fruits, and the physical appearance of the Buddha, just like a hunter outwardly donning a kāṣāya while inwardly harboring lethal intent. Māra is likewise: outwardly appearing as a sagely form while inwardly harboring heretical plots. Now, outflow-free realization resides in the mind, not in physical matter; how can one speak of fabricating an outflow-free form? A sage possesses outflow-free deportment, which is also the outflow-free five aggregates; hence māra imitates it. From "that Pāpīyas will make such a statement" downward, the second part clarifies the disturbance of voice. The text comprises five sections: first, disturbing the Buddha's body; second, disturbing the establishment of precepts; third, disturbing the Buddha's virtues; fourth, disturbing the sūtras and vinaya; fifth, disturbing transgressions and merits. First, regarding disturbing the Buddha's body, there are again four aspects: first, disturbing his birth; second, disturbing his deeds; third, disturbing his entering the temple; fourth, disturbing his taking a consort. In the first text, if one says he was actually born, this is māra's preaching; if one says he was born without being born, this is the Buddha's preaching. Next, regarding his deeds, it should likewise follow this pattern. That it is not so here is because clarifying that he did not act is māra's preaching, whereas that he acted is the Buddha's preaching. Why? Heretical māras constantly wish to conceal the Buddha's virtues and display the Buddha's faults; this is called disturbing the Buddha's deeds. Entering the temple and taking a consort are all as in the text. From "when the Buddha was in Śrāvastī" onward is disturbing the establishment of precepts, as in the text. As for the sixty-four abilities, the Buddha has thirty-two marks; non-Buddhists boastfully claimed they were twice as superior as the Buddha, hence they spoke of having sixty-four abilities. Furthermore, the Buddha has thirty-two marks along with their karmic causes; non-Buddhists sought to match them as equals, hence they posited the sixty-four abilities. Third, from "if there is someone who states" onward is disturbing the Buddha's virtues. Herein it clarifies that the Buddha does not know good from bad, does not differentiate enemies from kin, and neither rejoices nor hates when slashed with a knife or smeared with incense—just as people say of an eye being poked without blinking; this is disturbing virtue through a deluded intent. Fourth, from "if there is someone who says the Tathāgata for my sake" is disturbing the sūtras and vinaya. First, it causes disturbance generally with respect to the sūtras and vinaya; subsequently, it causes disturbance with respect to permanence and impermanence, as in the text. Fifth, from "again, there are people who say" onward is disturbing transgressions and merits. The text comprises three rounds: first, clarifying orthodoxy; next, clarifying heresy; third, further clarifying orthodoxy. In the first, a monk knows himself not to be a sage; answering that he is not a sage, there is then no transgression. Next, from "again, there are those who state there is no pārājika" onward is heresy. Third, from "if it is further stated: among all precepts" onward further clarifies orthodoxy. If one transgresses a single dharma, when reciting the precepts, upon being initially asked whether one is pure, if one does not answer after three proclamations, one commits false speech, and so forth. Although all sentient beings possess the buddhadhātu, it must depend on upholding precepts: the buddhadhātu is the direct cause, and upholding precepts is the concurrent condition, and so forth. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 11.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.11.5) - [Next: 11.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.11.7) - [Up: 11](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.11) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767~en-mt.11.6) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [大般涅槃經](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.sanskrit.mahayanasutra.mahaparinirvana-mahayana*zh-t375.7.34) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.11.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.11.6) · Pramāṇa