[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) › [起信論疏筆削記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848) › 11.37 # 起信論疏筆削記 11.37 起信論疏筆削記 11.37 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [11.37](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.11.37) 正引中，疏　依此等者，眾生即不覺也，不覺無體，即是真如。真如之理即涅槃性，性自寂滅，何待更滅？滅度、涅槃，即彼此方言也。《淨名》下，彌勒章文，如前所引。《大品》亦云：斷一切結入涅槃者，是世俗法，非第一義。何以故？空中無有滅，亦無所滅者，諸法畢竟空，即是涅槃故。依此等者，菩提梵音，秦言云覺。覺即始本二覺，二覺既是真如菩提，豈從修得？故《大品》云：以何義故名菩提？空義故是菩提，如義、法性義、實際義等是菩提也。此上約眾生明不覺即真如，故本來涅槃。諸佛覺亦真如故，菩提不可修作。既言修作，應知約果所得，故疏云諸佛也。以本有故，何須修作而後得耶？故云非可等。 > In the section containing the direct citations: The Commentary states: Regarding "Relying on this...", sentient beings are non-enlightenment; non-enlightenment has no intrinsic nature, so it is just tathatā. The principle of tathatā is the nature of nirvāṇa; its nature is intrinsically quiescent and extinct, so how could it wait for further extinction? "Extinction" (miedu) and "nirvāṇa" are terms in the respective regional languages \[of China and India\]. Regarding "In the Vimalakīrti\[-nirdeśa\]...", this is the passage from the Chapter on Maitreya cited earlier. The Large Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra also says: "Severing all fetters and entering nirvāṇa is conventional truth, not the ultimate truth. Why? In emptiness there is no extinction, nor is there anything to be extinguished; all dharmas are ultimately empty, which is itself nirvāṇa." Regarding "Relying on this...", bodhi is the Sanskrit word, which in the language of Qin is rendered as enlightenment (jue). Enlightenment comprises both actualized and original enlightenment; since both enlightenments are tathatā-bodhi, how could it be obtained through cultivation? Therefore the Large Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra states: "On account of what meaning is it called bodhi? Because of the meaning of emptiness it is bodhi; the meaning of thusness, the meaning of dharmatā, the meaning of the true limit, and so forth, are bodhi." The above, with respect to sentient beings, clarifies that non-enlightenment is tathatā, and therefore is fundamentally nirvāṇa. The enlightenment of all buddhas is also tathatā, and therefore bodhi cannot be cultivated or produced. Since "cultivated and produced" is said, one should know this refers to what is attained at the level of fruition; hence the Commentary says "all buddhas." Since it is fundamentally possessed, why would it require cultivation and production to be obtained thereafter? Hence it says: "It cannot be..." and so forth. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 11.36](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.11.36) - [Next: 11.38](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.11.38) - [Up: 11](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.11) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848~en-mt.11.37) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.11.37](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1848.11.37) · Pramāṇa