[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) › 13.7 # 大般涅槃經疏 13.7 大般涅槃經疏 13.7 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [13.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.13.7) 「爾時佛告」下，第二領瑞結成，為二：前命迦葉領、次命純陀領。前迦葉文中云復見大眾說十三偈者，一云：佛與大眾各說十三偈。此文是佛說，大眾偈不來。二云：又見大眾屬上句，說十三偈屬佛，不是大眾說十三偈。於命迦葉領中，文為四：一命、二領、三推功在佛、四推菩薩能知。次命純陀亦四：一命、二領、三佛重結、四迦葉隨喜。「世尊一切契經」下，第三章，答上云何為眾生演說於祕密問，兼答遠離一切病得近無上道三問。但有餘之偈，是如來隱覆隨緣之說，非平道顯理究竟之義。今演隱覆令祕顯露，即是酬其上問。而文中明五逆、四重、謗法三種病人罪滅病愈，即是兼答遠離一切病，由病差罪滅得近無上道，兼答兩問意在於此。文為二：初略問答、次廣出七偈。初中，初略標有餘無餘之問、次略答有餘是不了是密無餘是了是顯（云云）。次「純陀白」下，是廣出七偈問答，即為七章，七章或是純陀舉、或是文殊舉、或佛自出（云云）。初一章是純陀請問，文為六：一簡闡提、二取三罪人、三釋取意、四釋簡意、五結偈、六緣起。初簡闡提中有四番問答。初舉偈請釋云何一切布施皆可讚歎？布施持戒可讚，布施破戒云何可讚？次佛答中，除一闡提。第二第三番問答，可見。第四番問何名闡提。次佛答中有三番：初通說四部弟子謗法造重究竟無改，雖非即是，而亦趣向一闡提道；第二番指四重五逆；第三指說言無佛法眾撥無因果。除三番外，施皆可歎。「爾時純陀復白」下，是次問答取三罪人，即四重等。於中三：初一問答略出三相、次廣明四重謗法五逆可滅、後別明誹謗因緣。初略，如文。次廣中，先問、次答中意為三：初明滅惡法、次釋滅惡法、三正明惡滅。初滅惡法者，河西云：有六妙藥，一發菩提心、二慚愧悔過、三守護法、四恭敬護法者、五達罪相、六受持解說大乘經典。此亦六緣，大同小異：一被法服、二慚愧改悔、三生護法心、四供養護法者、五自受持讀誦、六為他說。河西云：發心達罪亦可會此。次「何以故」下，釋中即釋其意，有譬、合、結三。「若有毀謗」下，正明惡滅。應具如前，而今文略，直言還歸正法，舉是舉非。犯五逆者，明五逆可滅，亦舉是舉非。此中三罪皆悉可滅，即是兼答遠離一切病問。既得滅罪，即得近於無上之道。「又善男子犯重罪者」下，第三釋取三罪人意，有法、譬、合。譬為四：一未生解、二已生解、三明護法、四得果報。初譬造罪破戒時。女譬淺行菩薩有生解義，如女懷妊蘊解未發。值國荒亂譬破戒眾。持犯路絕，故言遠至他土。次在一天廟譬生解。天廟譬此經，依經生解。舊邦豐熟，聞持戒功德所得果報。三路經恒河譬護法，斷常邪眾譬恒河，邪辯忉諂譬河水暴急。寧失報命不捨其解，故言不獨濟也。四命終之後，是得果報生天。三「犯四重」下合譬，可尋。四「純陀復言」下，釋簡闡提，先問、次答。答中三：法、譬、合。法中意云施此人不得福也。「譬如有」下譬，既破核竟，種則不生，施一闡提如種破核。然闡提改悔則非闡提，下文云「闡提作佛亦名謗佛，言不作佛亦名謗佛。若言闡提悔而作佛，是不謗佛。」合，如文。五「善男子」下，結偈意。前一切施可稱歎者，是有餘說；今明差別，則無餘說。六「純陀復言」下，是說偈緣起。 > From "At that time the Buddha addressed" onward is the second \[section\], in which the auspicious signs are comprehended and concluded. It has two \[parts\]: first, he commands Kāśyapa to comprehend; next, he commands Cunda to comprehend. In the earlier passage concerning Kāśyapa, where it says, "he again saw the great assembly speak thirteen verses," one \[explanation\] states: "The Buddha and the great assembly each spoke thirteen verses." This text \[here\] is what the Buddha spoke, and the verses of the great assembly did not arrive. The second \[explanation\] states: "'Again saw the great assembly' belongs to the preceding phrase, and 'spoke thirteen verses' belongs to the Buddha; it does not mean that the great assembly spoke thirteen verses." In commanding Kāśyapa to comprehend, the text has four \[parts\]: (1) the command, (2) the comprehension, (3) attributing the merit to the Buddha, and (4) attributing to the bodhisattvas the capacity to know. Next, commanding Cunda likewise has four \[parts\]: (1) the command, (2) the comprehension, (3) the Buddha's recapitulation, and (4) Kāśyapa's rejoinder. From "World-Honored One, in all discourses" onward is the third chapter, which answers the question above, "Why expound the secret for sentient beings?" and concurrently answers the questions on "distantly leaving all illnesses" and "approaching the unexcelled path"—three questions in total. However, the verses with remainder are the Tathāgata's concealed and accommodating teachings, not the ultimate meaning that directly reveals the principle. Now, by expounding what was concealed and making the secret manifest, he precisely answers the question above. And because the text explains that for the three kinds of ill persons—those \[guilty of\] the five inexpiable offenses, the four gravest offenses, and slander of the Dharma—their sins are eradicated and their illnesses cured, this concurrently answers the question on "distantly leaving all illnesses"; and since their illnesses are cured and their sins eradicated, they are able to approach the unexcelled path, which is why these two questions are answered concurrently. The text has two \[parts\]: first, a brief question and answer; next, extensively presenting seven verses. In the first, it briefly marks the question of with remainder and without remainder, and next briefly answers that "with remainder" is non-definitive and secret, while "without remainder" is definitive and manifest, etc. Next, from "Cunda said" onward, it extensively presents the questions and answers regarding the seven verses, which constitutes seven chapters. These seven chapters are either raised by Cunda, raised by Mañjuśrī, or presented by the Buddha himself, etc. The first chapter is Cunda's inquiry, and the text has six \[parts\]: (1) excluding the icchantika, (2) accepting the three sinners, (3) explaining the intention in accepting them, (4) explaining the intention in excluding \[the icchantika\], (5) concluding with the verse, and (6) the circumstances of origin. First, in excluding the icchantika, there are four rounds of questions and answers. First, raising the verse to request an explanation: "Why is all giving praiseworthy? Giving \[to those who\] uphold the precepts is praiseworthy; how can giving \[to those who\] break the precepts be praiseworthy?" Next, in the Buddha's reply, he excludes the icchantika. The second and third rounds of questions and answers are clear. The fourth round asks what is meant by "icchantika." Next, in the Buddha's reply, there are three rounds: first, generally speaking of disciples of the four assemblies who slander the Dharma and commit the gravest offenses with utter absence of repentance—though not yet precisely this, they nonetheless head toward the path of the icchantika; the second round points to the four gravest offenses and the five inexpiable offenses; the third points to those who say that the Buddha, Dharma, and Saṅgha do not exist and who negate causes and effects. Except for these three rounds, giving is in all cases praiseworthy. From "At that time Cunda further addressed" onward is the next question and answer, which accepts the three sinners, that is, those of the four gravest offenses, etc. Within this are three \[parts\]: first, a question and answer briefly presenting the three marks; next, extensively explaining that \[the sins of\] the four gravest offenses, slander of the Dharma, and the five inexpiable offenses can be eradicated; finally, separately explaining the causes and conditions for slander. The first, brief \[part\], is as in the text. In the second, extensive \[part\], first is the question; next, in the answer, the meaning comprises three \[points\]: first, explaining the method for eradicating evil; next, explaining the reason for eradicating evil; third, directly showing that evil is eradicated. As for the first, the method for eradicating evil, Héxī states: There are six wondrous medicines: (1) generating the bodhicitta, (2) feeling shame and repenting offenses, (3) guarding the Dharma, (4) revering and protecting those who preserve the Dharma, (5) thoroughly understanding the mark of offenses, and (6) receiving, upholding, and explaining the Mahāyāna scriptures. These are also six conditions, largely the same with minor differences: (1) donning the Dharma robes, (2) feeling shame, reforming, and repenting, (3) generating the resolve to protect the Dharma, (4) making offerings to those who protect the Dharma, (5) personally receiving, upholding, and reciting, and (6) expounding it for others. Héxī states: Generating the resolve and understanding offenses may also correspond to this. Next, from "Why is this?" onward, the explanation gives the meaning, which contains the metaphor, the application, and the conclusion. From "If there are those who slander" onward, it directly shows that evil is eradicated. It should be fully as before, but the present text is abbreviated, directly stating that they return to the true Dharma, adducing both what is right and what is wrong. For those who commit the five inexpiable offenses, it explains that the five inexpiable offenses can be eradicated, likewise adducing both what is right and what is wrong. Here, all three offenses can be eradicated, which concurrently answers the question on distantly leaving all illnesses. Since they are able to eradicate their sins, they are able to approach the unexcelled path. From "Furthermore, good man, if one who has committed gravest offenses" onward is the third \[part\], explaining the intention in accepting the three sinners, having the teaching, the metaphor, and the application. The metaphor has four \[aspects\]: (1) before understanding has arisen, (2) after understanding has arisen, (3) protecting the Dharma, and (4) obtaining the fruit-retribution. The first illustrates the time of committing offenses and breaking precepts. The woman illustrates a bodhisattva of shallow practice having the capacity to generate understanding, just as a woman who is pregnant carries understanding not yet manifested. Encountering a famished and chaotic country illustrates the assembly that breaks precepts. The road between upholding and violating is severed, hence it says "traveling far to another land." Next, being in a heavenly temple illustrates the arising of understanding. The heavenly temple illustrates this sūtra, relying on which understanding arises. The old land being rich and abundant \[illustrates\] the fruit-retribution obtained from the merit of hearing and upholding the precepts. Third, passing along the Gaṅgā River illustrates protecting the Dharma; the heterodox assemblies of eternalism and annihilationism illustrate the Gaṅgā River; and heterodox eloquence, deception, and sycophancy illustrate the violent torrent of the river water. Rather losing one's life of retribution than relinquishing one's understanding, hence it says "not crossing alone." Fourth, after the end of life, this is obtaining the fruit-retribution of being born in heaven. Third, from "those who commit the four gravest offenses" onward is the application of the metaphor, which can be examined. Fourth, from "Cunda further said" onward explains the exclusion of the icchantika, first asking and next answering. In the answer are three \[aspects\]: the teaching, the metaphor, and the application. In the teaching, the meaning is that giving to such a person yields no merit. From "For example, there is" onward is the metaphor: once the kernel is broken, the seed will not sprout; giving to an icchantika is like planting a broken kernel. However, if an icchantika repents and reforms, they are no longer an icchantika. Later text states: "Saying an icchantika becomes a buddha is also called slandering the Buddha; saying they do not become a buddha is also called slandering the Buddha. If one says that an icchantika repents and becomes a buddha, this is not slandering the Buddha." The application is as in the text. Fifth, from "Good man" onward concludes the meaning of the verse. That previously all giving could be praised was a teaching with remainder; now explaining the distinction is a teaching without remainder. Sixth, from "Cunda further said" onward is the circumstances of origin for speaking the verse. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 13.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.13.6) - [Next: 13.8](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.13.8) - [Up: 13](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.13) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767~en-mt.13.7) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.13.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.13.7) · Pramāṇa