[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) › 22.25 # 大般涅槃經疏 22.25 大般涅槃經疏 22.25 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [22.25](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.22.25) 「爾時光明」下，第二論義。論前第八章心解脫，先問、次答。初問有三：先就本無奪難、次就本有縱難、三就不定難，皆令縛解。初文者又二：先領旨仰非、次正問。問中意者，若心本有煩惱，此亦不可；本無煩惱，此亦不可。定有煩惱，此亦不可；定無，亦不可。就初立本無難中有九，世尊為三意：初一雙明心無縛無脫、次有五偏明無縛、後三偏明無脫。此即初文，正難無縛無脫。「若心本性」下，第二、五中偏明無縛，又二：前四明無所縛、後一明無能縛。舉安橛譬木卓空中無因倚住（云云）。「若心無貪」下，第三、三者偏明無解，為三：初明無解、二明無得解者、三明無得解道。「世尊貪亦是有」下，第二據本有作縱問，又二意：一明若本有者：應善心中有貪；二「譬如鑽火」下，明應前境中有貪。初中又二：先法說、次舉二譬。初法說中意者，若言心本有貪，是亦不可，本有則不從因緣。既借他色而生貪者，當知非有。又心本有貪，不可令無，應不得脫，心應常貪。次以境對心，亦如是難。「世尊心亦不定」下，第三據不定為難，又三：初明心不定、次明貪不定、三明貪及境亦俱不定。 > From "At that time, Brightness..." onward is the second \[section\], debating the doctrine. It debates the liberation of mind of the previous eighth heading: first questioning, next answering. The initial question has three parts: first, a destructive objection based on original non-existence; second, a permissive objection based on original existence; third, an objection based on indeterminacy—all causing bondage and liberation \[to be examined\]. As for the first text, it also has two parts: first, taking up the essential meaning and respectfully questioning its correctness; second, the direct question. The intent within the question is: if the mind originally has defilement, this is untenable; if it originally lacks defilement, this is also untenable. If it determinately has defilement, this is untenable; if it determinately lacks it, it is also untenable. Regarding the initial formulation of the objection based on original non-existence, there are nine \[points\]; the World-Honoured One had three intents: the first one clarifies both that the mind has neither bondage nor liberation; the next five specifically clarify that there is no bondage; the last three specifically clarify that there is no liberation. This is precisely the first passage, directly objecting that there is neither bondage nor liberation. From "If the mind's original nature..." onward is the second, which among the five specifically clarifies that there is no bondage, having two parts: the former four clarify that there is nothing bound; the latter one clarifies that there is no binder. It raises the simile of setting up a peg: a piece of wood standing in the air has no basis on which to lean and abide (and so on). From "If the mind has no greed..." onward is the third, where the three specifically clarify that there is no liberation, consisting of three parts: first, clarifying that there is no liberation; second, clarifying that there is no one who attains liberation; third, clarifying that there is no path for attaining liberation. From "World-Honoured One, greed is also existent..." onward is the second, which raises a permissive question based on original existence, also having two intents: one clarifies that if it originally exists, there should be greed within a wholesome mind; second, from "Just as drilling for fire..." onward clarifies that there should be greed within the objective realm before it. The first part also has two: first, the doctrinal explanation; second, raising two similes. The intent in the initial doctrinal explanation is: if one says the mind originally has greed, this is also untenable; if it originally exists, then it does not derive from causes and conditions. Since it borrows external forms to produce greed, one should know it does not inherently exist. Furthermore, if the mind originally has greed, it cannot be made non-existent, so one should be unable to attain liberation, and the mind should be constantly greedy. Next, matching the objective realm to the mind, he also raises an objection in this way. From "World-Honoured One, the mind is also indeterminate..." onward is the third \[part\], raising an objection based on indeterminacy, which also has three parts: first, clarifying that the mind is indeterminate; second, clarifying that greed is indeterminate; third, clarifying that both greed and the objective realm are indeterminate. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 22.24](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.22.24) - [Next: 22.26](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.22.26) - [Up: 22](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.22) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767~en-mt.22.25) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.22.25](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.22.25) · Pramāṇa