[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) › 3.5 # 大般涅槃經疏 3.5 大般涅槃經疏 3.5 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [3.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.3.5) 次德行者，純陀是二恒之數，何故別立一品？略明十異：一時眾先供而後請，純陀先請而後供；二時眾三請佛皆默然，純陀一請如來即受；三因受大會；四因食開常；五自請住；六騰眾請；七金口歎；八大眾歎；九當徒問答；十往昔誓願。眾無其一，寧不立品？問：純陀十異逈超眾表，何不前供而後獻耶？答：後供者讓他德也。舊明五讓，謂賤讓貴、凡讓聖、麁讓妙、少讓多、近讓遠。今依文宜為十讓：初以俗讓道，謂僧尼眾；次以凡讓聖，謂學無學；三以淺讓深，謂諸菩薩；四以賤讓貴，即國王大臣；五以顯讓冥，謂天龍鬼神；六以少麁讓多妙，謂人天等；七以財讓法，即是魔眾；八以同類讓異類，即師子鳥蠭等；九以近讓遠，謂十方菩薩；十以城旁讓隱遯，忍辱仙眾。五讓收文不盡，十意粗周。問：何故昔默今默而有受不受異？答：佛意難知，今通別兩解。今昔二默俱是四悉，世人所默有受不受，佛隨世界故有二默受不受異，或宜默受、宜默不受，二俱生善。欲生彼善故有二默，破惡得道亦復如是，聖無唐捐非凡所測。別釋者，時眾無奇緣弱不感，令追責往緣，是名世界默然不受。初若發言不受則後供息心，眾供都集普皆等受，是名為人默然不受。默不受者，貶其不能因食以明不食，開無常顯常無勝治力，是名對治默然不受。若是食身可默受食，法身常諸無食無受，是名第一義默然不受。默然不受是佛境界，義不可盡，略言四耳。 > Next, regarding virtuous conduct: Cunda was \[merely one\] among the count of the two Ganges \[sands of beings\]; why establish a distinct chapter for him? Ten distinctions are briefly explained: first, the assembly first made offerings and afterwards made their requests, whereas Cunda first made his request and afterwards made his offering; second, the assembly requested three times and the Buddha remained silent each time, whereas Cunda requested once and the Tathāgata accepted immediately; third, because of \[his offering\], the great assembly was accepted; fourth, through food, the permanent was revealed; fifth, he personally requested \[the Buddha\] to remain; sixth, he reiterated the assembly's request; seventh, he was praised by the golden mouth \[of the Buddha\]; eighth, he was praised by the great assembly; ninth, the dialogue took place right before the assembly; tenth, his past vows. Since the assembly lacked even one of these, how could a chapter not be established? Question: If Cunda's ten distinctions vastly surpassed those of the assembly, why did he not offer first rather than presenting \[his offering\] later? Answer: Offering later was yielding to the virtues of others. Formerly, five yieldings were explained: the lowly yields to the noble, the ordinary yields to the noble, the coarse yields to the sublime, the few yield to the many, and the near yields to the far. Now, in accord with the text, there should be ten yieldings: first, yielding with the secular to the religious, meaning the community of monks and nuns; second, yielding with the ordinary to the noble, meaning those in training and beyond training; third, yielding with the shallow to the deep, meaning the bodhisattvas; fourth, yielding with the lowly to the noble, meaning kings and great ministers; fifth, yielding with the manifest to the hidden, meaning devas, nāgas, ghosts, and spirits; sixth, yielding with the few and coarse to the many and sublime, meaning humans, devas, and the like; seventh, yielding with material wealth to the Dharma, which refers to Māra's hosts; eighth, yielding with one's own kind to different kinds, meaning lions, birds, bees, and the like; ninth, yielding with the near to the far, meaning the bodhisattvas of the ten directions; tenth, yielding with those dwelling near cities to the recluses, meaning the assembly of forbearant ṛṣis. The five yieldings do not exhaust the text; the ten meanings are roughly complete. Question: Why is there a difference between acceptance and non-acceptance when both in the past and in the present \[the Buddha remained\] silent? Answer: The Buddha's intent is difficult to fathom; now it is explained generally and specifically. Both silences, past and present, are the four siddhāntas. Among worldly people, silence may indicate acceptance or non-acceptance; the Buddha, according to the mundane world, thus manifested two silences with the difference of acceptance and non-acceptance: either it was fitting to accept silently, or it was fitting to refuse silently; both generate goodness. Wishing to generate their goodness, he therefore had two silences; destroying evil and attaining the path are also like this. The sage does nothing in vain; it cannot be measured by ordinary people. In the specific explanation: the contemporary assembly had no extraordinary condition and their connection was weak, so they could not move \[the Buddha\], causing them to reflect upon and reproach their past conditions; this is called the mundane silent non-acceptance. If at first he had spoken words of refusal, the subsequent offerings would have ceased; when the offerings of the assembly were fully gathered, he accepted them universally and equally; this is called the individual-adapted silent non-acceptance. Silently not accepting was to reprove their inability to use food to clarify non-eating, and that their revealing of the permanent against the impermanent lacked superior remedial power; this is called the therapeutic silent non-acceptance. If it were a physical body sustained by food, it could silently accept food; the Dharma-body is eternally \[abiding\], with neither eating nor accepting; this is called the ultimate silent non-acceptance. Silent non-acceptance is the realm of the Buddha; its meaning is inexhaustible; these four are merely stated in brief. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 3.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.3.4) - [Next: 3.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.3.6) - [Up: 3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.3) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767~en-mt.3.5) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.3.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1767.3.5) · Pramāṇa