[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) › [俱舍論疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822) › 1.12 # 俱舍論疏 1.12 俱舍論疏 1.12 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.12](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.1.12) 四、三藏教起緣者，說素呾纜藏，依力等流：一為眾生得增上心學論道故、二為眾生種種雜說故、三令諸眾生種善根故、四為未入正法令入正法故。說毘奈耶藏，依悲等流：一為眾生得增上戒學論道故、二為眾生說諸學處故、三為已種善根者令相續成就故、四令入正法者令受持學處故。說阿毘達磨藏，依無畏等流：一依增上慧學論道故、二分別諸法自共相故、三為已成就者令得正解脫故、四為已受持學處通達諸法真實相故。問：素呾纜中有毘奈耶等，毘奈耶中有阿毘達磨等，阿毘達磨中有素呾纜等，此則三藏無有差別。答：《婆沙》一說從勝立名。此經律論中雖一部內兼明三藏，然說就多分立藏名。二即從所明立三藏名，此謂三藏不全分部，隨所明義，即依彼文立三藏別。問：何故弟子唯造對法，不造素呾纜藏及毘奈耶藏耶？答：素呾纜藏次第所顯，謂素呾纜中應求次第，何故世尊此品無間宣說彼品等？此隨當時機宜次第，佛為教主，佛在世時承佛神力。如此說者，亦同得名經。佛滅度後，弟子不可自造經也。毘奈耶藏緣起所顯，謂毘奈耶中應求緣起。世尊依何緣起制立彼彼學處？制立學處唯在於佛，不在弟子。雖亦有別教誡學徒，然不名為毘奈耶藏。阿毘達磨應求諸法真實性相，不應求彼次第緣起，或前或後、或無緣起說，俱無過失。唯此弟子釋佛所說幽隱法性故，亦得名阿毘達磨。故弟子所制得名對法，非經、律也。然有弟子釋經及律，皆名為論，不名經、律。唯此弟子造論釋佛三藏。 > Fourth, the conditions for the arising of the teachings of the Tripiṭaka: The Sūtra-piṭaka was spoken as an outflow of power: 1. to provide sentient beings with a method of discourse for the training in higher mind; 2. to provide various diverse explanations for sentient beings; 3. to cause sentient beings to plant roots of goodness; 4. to cause those who have not yet entered the correct Dharma to enter the correct Dharma. The Vinaya-piṭaka was spoken as an outflow of compassion: 1. to provide sentient beings with a method of discourse for the training in higher morality; 2. to explain the various training rules for sentient beings; 3. to bring about the maturation of the mental continua of those who have already planted roots of goodness; 4. to cause those who have entered the correct Dharma to uphold the training rules. The Abhidharma-piṭaka was spoken as an outflow of fearlessness: 1. based on the method of discourse for the training in higher wisdom; 2. to distinguish the specific and common characteristics of all dharmas; 3. to cause those who have already achieved maturation to attain correct liberation; 4. to cause those who have already upheld the training rules to thoroughly penetrate the real characteristics of all dharmas. Question: In the sūtras there is vinaya and so forth; in the vinaya there is abhidharma and so forth; in the abhidharma there are sūtras and so forth; thus the three piṭakas have no distinction. Answer: One explanation in the Vibhāṣā is that the names are established according to what is predominant. Although a single work among these sūtras, vinayas, and treatises may simultaneously clarify all three piṭakas, their names as piṭakas are designated according to their majority component. A second explanation is that the names of the three piṭakas are established according to what is clarified; this means that the three piṭakas are not strictly segregated collections, but rather the distinctions among the three piṭakas are established based on the text according to the meaning being clarified. Question: Why did the disciples compose only the Abhidharma, but not the Sūtra-piṭaka or the Vinaya-piṭaka? Answer: The Sūtra-piṭaka is revealed by sequence: that is, within the sūtras one should seek the sequence, such as why the World-Honoured One expounded that chapter immediately after this chapter. This sequence was adapted to the needs of the capacities at that time; the Buddha was the Master of the Teaching, and when the Buddha was in the world, one relied on the Buddha's spiritual power. Spoken in such a manner, it equally receives the name 'sūtra'. After the Buddha's passing into extinction, disciples could not compose sūtras on their own. The Vinaya-piṭaka is revealed by circumstances of origin: that is, within the vinaya one should seek the circumstances of origin. Depending on what circumstances of origin did the World-Honoured One institute this or that training rule? The instituting of training rules lies solely with the Buddha and not with disciples. Although there were also distinctive admonitions given to students, they are not called the Vinaya-piṭaka. As for the Abhidharma, one should seek the real nature and characteristics of dharmas; one should not seek their sequence or circumstances of origin. Whether spoken earlier or later, or without circumstances of origin, in both cases there is no fault. It is solely because these disciples explained the profound, hidden nature of dharmas expounded by the Buddha that it also receives the name 'Abhidharma'. Therefore, what was composed by the disciples receives the name 'Abhidharma' and not 'sūtra' or 'vinaya'. However, when disciples explain sūtras and vinaya, these are all termed 'treatises' (śāstra) and are not termed sūtra or vinaya. It is only in this sense that disciples composed treatises to explain the Buddha's Tripiṭaka. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.11](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.1.11) - [Next: 1.13](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.1.13) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822~en-mt.1.12) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [俱舍論頌疏論本](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1823.1.19) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.1.12](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.1.12) · Pramāṇa