[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) › [維摩經玄疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1777) › 5.39 # 維摩經玄疏 5.39 維摩經玄疏 5.39 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [5.39](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1777.5.39) 又，無翻者問有翻者曰：若言「昔兩國之言未通，故云無翻；今兩國之語既通，定有翻者」，修多羅但是外國之一言，今何得翻者不同，五語各異？若一翻為是，餘四則非，孰是孰非？若五翻俱是，彼一此五，一不可為五，五不可為一，此為大妨。若五語俱非，定知無翻，設更出異翻，皆不可用。 > Furthermore, those who hold "untranslatable" ask those who hold "translatable": "If you say, 'Formerly the languages of the two countries were not mutually intelligible, hence it was called untranslatable; now that the languages of the two countries are intelligible, there is definitely a translation,' then sūtra is only a single word from a foreign country. Why now are the translators not uniform, with five terms each differing? If one translation is right, the remaining four are wrong; which is right and which is wrong? If all five translations are right, that \[source\] is one while this is five; one cannot be five, and five cannot be one, which presents a major contradiction. If all five terms are wrong, then it is definitively known to be untranslatable; even if further differing translations are produced, none can be used." > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 5.38](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1777.5.38) - [Next: 5.40](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1777.5.40) - [Up: 5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1777.5) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1777~en-mt.5.39) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1777.5.39](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1777.5.39) · Pramāṇa