[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) › 19.236 # 俱舍論疏 19.236 俱舍論疏 19.236 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [19.236](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.19.236) 論「若爾應俱是反詰記」，難也。如有請言：為我說道。此名問道。由反詰記彼所問，即是記道。若爾者，前問、後問俱是反詰記，因何於中有分別記？ > The Śāstra says: "If so, both should be cross-examining explanations." This is an objection. If someone makes a request, saying: "Teach me the path"—this is called asking about the path. Because cross-examination explains what was asked, that itself is explaining the path. If so, both the former question and the latter question would be cross-examining explanations; why then is there an analytical explanation among them? > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 19.235](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.19.235) - [Next: 19.237](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.19.237) - [Up: 19](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.19) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822~en-mt.19.236) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.19.236](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.19.236) · Pramāṇa