[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) › 26.5 # 大般涅槃經疏 26.5 大般涅槃經疏 26.5 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [26.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.26.5) 「是人若得」下，第二明解，又四：初明近聽思行，皆如文。「師子吼言空中無刺」下，第二番，先問、後答。初問又二：初作逆喻，舉空中無刺。後舉陰無繫者，云何繫縛？上〈德王〉云「心本無貪，云何貪欲能繫於心？」即是此義。答為二，謂法、譬。初法者，就理為論，謂續故不斷、壞故不常，不斷不常非縛非解。若未達斯理即有縛解。舉屋舉拳，約掌合時論縛、掌離時論開，本不合時論不縛不開，繫縛等三即此意也。縛即論假、脫即論真、不縛不脫即論中道，乃是三諦相即之相。「師子吼言如眼」下，第三番，先問、次答。此問躡前答文作難。前云名色縛眾生、眾生縛名色。名色只是眾生，云何自縛？如刀不自割。故後復難：若其眾生只是名色者，還是名色縛於名色，云何名色能縛眾生？答，如文。「師子吼言若有名色是繫縛」下，第四番問答。問，如文。答中有法、譬、合。初法說中，羅漢子爛故無縛，報在故有縛。而言未見佛性者，大乘望之，子果俱縛，小乘不爾。次譬合，如文。「師子吼言燈之與油」下，第五番，亦先問、次答。初問意者，佛前言燈喻眾生、油喻煩惱；今難此語，有兩解。一云：燈覽眾法，明油器等共成一燈，明名燈明、器名燈器。二云：明與油異，正取明為燈。燈是火性、油是濕性，正取後意為難。燈之與油二性各異，眾生煩惱本來不異，云何為喻？佛答為二：初舉八喻、後合燈喻。八喻為二：初列章、次解釋。從小向大為順喻，從大向小為逆喻。現者，取現事為現喻，前逆順亦是現事，除逆順邊取餘現事。非者，都非其類。先者，先喻後合。後者，先法後譬。渧，此是帝音。滴，此是的音。先後可解。此中應作養音，上看下為養，下看上為樣音。遍喻者，盡其始末。 > From "if this person attains" downward is the second part, explaining liberation, which also has four parts: first, explaining nearing, listening, reflecting, and practicing, all as in the text. From "Siṃhanāda said: 'There are no thorns in the sky'" downward is the second round: first the question, and later the answer. The initial question again has two parts: first, presenting a counter-parable, bringing up that there are no thorns in the sky; later, bringing up that there is no binder in the aggregates, so how could there be tying and binding? Above, the "Virtue King" \[chapter\] says, "The mind originally lacks greed; how could greedy desire bind the mind?" This is precisely that meaning. The answer has two parts, namely, the phenomenon and the parable. As for the first, the phenomenon: discussing it in terms of principle, it means that because of continuity it is not annihilated, and because of disintegration it is not permanent; being neither annihilated nor permanent, it is neither bondage nor liberation. If one has not realized this principle, then there are bondage and liberation. Adducing the house and adducing the fist, one discusses binding with reference to when the palms are joined, and one discusses opening with reference to when the palms are separated; when they were originally not joined, one discusses neither binding nor opening. The three terms, such as "tying and binding," have precisely this meaning. Bondage pertains to the provisional, release pertains to the real, and neither bondage nor release pertains to the middle way; this is the characteristic of the mutual identity of the three truths. From "Siṃhanāda said: 'Like the eye'" downward is the third round: first the question, and next the answer. This question follows on the preceding text of the answer to raise a challenge. Previously it said that name-and-form binds sentient beings, and sentient beings bind name-and-form. Name-and-form is merely sentient beings; how could it bind itself? Just as a knife does not cut itself. Therefore he later challenges again: if sentient beings are merely name-and-form, it is still name-and-form binding name-and-form; how could name-and-form bind sentient beings? The answer is as in the text. From "Siṃhanāda said: 'If name-and-form is binding'" downward is the fourth round of question and answer. The question is as in the text. In the answer there are the phenomenon, the parable, and the application. In the initial statement of the phenomenon, because the arhat's seeds are rotted, there is no bondage; because the retribution remains, there is bondage. As for saying that they have not yet seen the buddhadhātu: looking at it from the Mahāyāna, both seed and fruit are bondage; the Hīnayāna does not hold this. Next, the parable and the application are as in the text. From "Siṃhanāda said: 'The lamp and the oil'" downward is the fifth round, which also has first the question, and next the answer. The intention of the initial question is: the Buddha previously said that the lamp is a parable for sentient beings and the oil is a parable for afflictions; now challenging this statement, there are two explanations. One says: the lamp brings together many phenomena, so that the light, oil, vessel, and so forth together form one lamp; the light is called the lamp's light, and the vessel is called the lamp's vessel. The other says: the light and the oil are distinct; one strictly takes the light to be the lamp. The lamp is of the nature of fire, and the oil is of the nature of wetness; it strictly takes the latter meaning to raise the challenge. The lamp and the oil are each distinct in nature, while sentient beings and afflictions are originally not distinct; how can this serve as a parable? The Buddha's answer has two parts: first, adducing eight parables; later, applying the parable of the lamp. The eight parables have two parts: first, listing the headings; next, explaining them. Moving from small to large is a direct parable; moving from large to small is a reverse parable. "Present" means taking present affairs as a present parable; the preceding reverse and direct are also present affairs, but setting aside the aspects of reverse and direct, one takes other present affairs. "Discrepant" means completely not of that category. "Prior" means the parable first, followed by the application. "Posterior" means the phenomenon first, followed by the parable. \*Dì\* \[渧\] has the sound \*dì\* \[帝\]. \*Dī\* \[滴\] has the sound \*dī\* \[的\]. Prior and posterior can be understood. Here it should have the tone \*yǎng\* \[養\]; looking down from above is \*yǎng\*, and looking up from below has the sound \*yàng\* \[樣\]. A comprehensive parable is one that exhausts its beginning and end. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 26.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.26.4) - [Next: 26.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.26.6) - [Up: 26](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.26) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767~en-mt.26.5) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.26.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.26.5) · Pramāṇa