[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) › [金光明經文句](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1785) › 1.22 # 金光明經文句 1.22 金光明經文句 1.22 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.22](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1785.1.22) 「是金光明」下，敘述序。若敘正說流通十七品意，已如上說。今更論敘述五重玄義。初十二行半敘名體宗用，次十四行半即敘流通弘宣此典，即是敘教相也。就初一句敘名，次一句敘體，次三行敘宗，次九行敘用。「護世」下去敘教相也。解者或言：金光明一句猶是敘體，如鑛石中金，金體乃非光非明，不妨約金論內外用，法性非宗非力，亦依法性起於宗力。當知此句正是敘體，今明理乃當然，分文則屬敘名也。經王，上已說，今更述之。三藏云：「三德攝三，《涅槃》正斷二乘斷見，《般若》正遣凡夫有著，《華嚴》正化始行菩薩。今經通為八位人，故稱王也。」此語難解。《涅槃》為菩薩說甚深微妙行處，豈止為二乘？《般若》云「法身佛為法身菩薩說法。」其聽法眾非生死人，豈止遣凡夫有著？《華嚴》說初地乃至說十地，豈止為始行菩薩？作此偏說，無智之人於諸經起輕慢，此義不可。今言經王者，若取文為經，即是三種俗諦；若取理為經，即是三種真諦；若取文理合為經，即是三種中道。若說餘諦，是經而非王；若說中道，是經復是王，於九種經中而得自在。但經王是一，隨緣設教名字不同。《華嚴》云法身，方等為實相，《般若》稱佛母，《法華》為髻珠，《涅槃》名佛師，皆是法性異名，通為諸經作體。譬如諸性應運迭興，龍師鳥官隨時霸立，百代雖異而統王是一。法性亦爾。宜聞《大品》佛母為王，餘名廢息。宜聞《法華》寶所為王，餘名廢息。法性為金光明之王，亦復如是。若作此解，上不違佛經王之旨，下不增長眾生我慢。 > From "This Suvarṇaprabhāsa" onward is the narrative preface. If we narrate the intention of the seventeen chapters of the main discourse and transmission sections, that has already been explained above. Now we shall further discuss and narrate the fivefold profound meaning. The first twelve and a half lines narrate the name, substance, principle, and function; the next fourteen and a half lines narrate the transmission and wide proclamation of this scripture, which is to say, narrating the characteristics of the teaching. As for the very first phrase, it narrates the name; the next phrase narrates the substance; the next three lines narrate the principle; the next nine lines narrate the function. From "protecting the world" downward narrates the characteristics of the teaching. Some commentators say: the phrase "Suvarṇaprabhāsa" is still a narration of the substance, just like gold within ore: the substance of gold is neither light nor brightness, but that does not prevent one from discussing internal and external functions with reference to the gold; dharmatā is neither principle nor power, yet principle and power are initiated in reliance on dharmatā. One should know that this phrase directly narrates the substance. Now we clarify that while in principle this is indeed so, in terms of dividing the text, it belongs to narrating the name. The "King of Sūtras" has been explained above, and now we narrate it once more. A Tripiṭaka \[master\] said: "The three virtues encompass the three \[teachings\]: the \*Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra\* specifically severs the annihilationist views of the two vehicles; the \*Prajñāpāramitā\* specifically dispels the attachment to existence of ordinary people; the \*Avataṃsaka\* specifically transforms bodhisattvas of initial practice. The present sūtra is shared by persons of the eight stations, and therefore it is called 'king'." These words are difficult to accept. The \*Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra\* explains the profound, subtle sphere of practice for bodhisattvas; how could it be only for the two vehicles? The \*Prajñāpāramitā\* says: "The Dharmakāya Buddha expounds the Dharma for Dharmakāya bodhisattvas." The assembly listening to the Dharma did not consist of people \[bound to\] birth-and-death; how could it only dispel the attachment to existence of ordinary people? The \*Avataṃsaka\* explains the first stage up to the tenth stage; how could it be only for bodhisattvas of initial practice? Making such one-sided statements causes unintelligent people to give rise to contempt toward the various sūtras; this doctrine is unacceptable. Now when we say 'king of sūtras': if one takes the text as the sūtra, it is the three kinds of conventional truth; if one takes the principle as the sūtra, it is the three kinds of absolute truth; if one combines text and principle as the sūtra, it is the three kinds of Middle Way. If it expounds other truths, it is a sūtra, but not a king; if it expounds the Middle Way, it is both a sūtra and a king, attaining mastery within the nine kinds of scriptures. However, the king of sūtras is one; according to conditions, teachings are established and their names differ. The \*Avataṃsaka\* calls it the dharmakāya; the vaipulya calls it the true mark; the \*Prajñāpāramitā\* designates it the mother of Buddhas; the \*Lotus Sūtra\* calls it the jewel in the topknot; the \*Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra\* names it the master of Buddhas. All of these are different names for dharmatā, which universally acts as the substance for all sūtras. For instance, the various clans rose alternately in response to the times; the Dragon Master and Bird Official established hegemony according to their seasons; though a hundred generations differed, the governing king was one. Dharmatā is also like this. For those suited to hear the \*Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā\*, the mother of Buddhas is the king, and other names are set aside. For those suited to hear the \*Lotus Sūtra\*, the place of treasures is the king, and other names are set aside. Dharmatā being the king of the \*Suvarṇaprabhāsa\* is also like this. If one understands it in this way, above, it does not contravene the Buddha's intent regarding the king of sūtras, and below, it does not foster the self-pride of sentient beings. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1785.1.21) - [Next: 1.23](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1785.1.23) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1785.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1785~en-mt.1.22) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1785.1.22](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1785.1.22) · Pramāṇa