[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) › [大乘義章](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1851) › 18.7 # 大乘義章 18.7 大乘義章 18.7 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [18.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1851.18.7) 次第四門開合辨相。其涅槃者，乃是諸佛圓寂妙果，體窮真性、義充法界，體窮真性故妙絕於名相，義充法界故德備於塵算。塵算之德難以定論，是以經中或云一二乃至眾多。言其一者，統而攝之，一大涅槃體含眾義備苞萬物。或說為二，二有三門：一者有餘無餘相對說二、二性淨方便相對說二、三真應不同相對說二。就初對中，先釋其名、後辨其相。名字如何？有餘無餘，義釋有二：一約對分別。煩惱盡處名為涅槃，約對身智以立二名，無學聖人煩惱盡竟，望後猶有餘身智在，約後別前，名前以為有餘涅槃；身智盡竟，望後更無餘身智在，望後名前，說前以為無餘涅槃。毘曇法中所說有餘無餘涅槃，正當此義。是第一約對分別。二就涅槃相望分別。於此門中，涅槃有二，具約生死因果以說，生死因盡是一涅槃，生死果亡是一涅槃。據彼生死因盡之處，望後更有生死果亡一涅槃在，約後別前，名為有餘。生死之果盡滅已竟，望後更無餘涅槃在，說為無餘。約對生死因果既然，約對分段變易亦爾。名字如是。次辨其相。曲有三門：一就大小相對分別、二就小分別、三就大分別。言就大小相對分者，小乘涅槃名曰有餘，大乘涅槃說為無餘。此之一義，如《勝鬘》說。故彼文言「生死二種，有為、無為。涅槃亦二種，有餘及無餘。」分段生死名曰有為，變易生死名曰無為，此二如前二生死中具廣分別。有為生死盡無之處，所得涅槃名曰有餘，望後更有餘生死故，又亦更有餘涅槃故。無為生死盡無之處，所得涅槃名曰無餘，望後更無餘生死故，又亦無其餘涅槃故。次第二門就小分別。宗別不同，所說各異。有人說言：毘曇法中煩惱盡滅名有餘涅槃，現報身上遠離緣縛說之以為無餘涅槃。是義不然。己家煩惱通縛內外一切境界，無學聖人初得果時是縛已斷，爾時不名無餘涅槃；現在身智謝滅之後，方始宣說無餘涅槃。何由而言身離緣縛名曰無餘？若此非者，何者是乎？毘曇法中涅槃體一，約對不同得二名字。言體一者，於此宗中煩惱業思，以道力故應起不起，數滅無為，是涅槃體，此體是一。約對身智得二名字：身智未盡，說前涅槃以為有餘，望後更有餘身智故；身智盡竟，向前涅槃轉名無餘，望後更無餘身智故。問曰：身智盡無之處，以何義故不名涅槃？彼宗身智起已謝往是無常滅，故非涅槃。由斷因故後果不起，是非數滅，故非涅槃。若依《成實》，涅槃體二：生死因盡是一涅槃、生死果盡是一涅槃，故有二種。問曰：何故毘曇法中生死果盡不名涅槃，《成實》名是？釋言：《毘曇》性相中求，為道親斷名為數滅，不親斷者則非數滅。身口二業及生死果非道親斷，故非數滅，故不名涅槃。成實法中解義務寬，由斷煩惱業果不起，從其根本亦是數滅，故說涅槃。此云何知？如《成實》說「見斷法者，示相我慢及彼所起諸餘法也。修斷法者，不示相慢及彼所起諸餘法也。」覺斷煩惱名示相慢，示猶見也。執見我人眾生定相，名為示相。執我陵物，稱之為慢。依此所起業及苦果，名為所起諸餘法也。由斷見惑，令此不起，通名見斷。修斷煩惱，名不示相慢。修道所斷，是鈍煩惱。不執我人眾生定相，名不示相。闇昧心中恃我陵物，目之為慢。依此所起業及苦果，名為所起諸餘法也。由斷修惑，令此不起，通名修斷。業及苦果，見修斷故，名為數滅。是數滅故，生死果盡得名涅槃。二種如是。此二涅槃，得之不定，或在同時、或在前後。若斷現因，令其當果畢竟不生，名曰無餘。此無餘滅，與有餘滅得在一時，以一時中具兩義故。能盡之智亦有二種，盡生死因名為盡智，斷生死果令後不起名無生智。若無學人，以邊際智促報取滅，名曰無餘。此無餘滅，與有餘滅得在前後，報盡方說無餘滅故。然無餘滅得雖不定，或前或後，彰名唯後。何故而然？現報未滅，障其未報不生不顯，故不與名。問曰：若使現報未盡不得宣說無餘滅者，亦應不得說無生智。智中既得說無生智，滅中何為偏獨不得？釋言：滅中身智盡後無餘義顯，故前隱之。智則不爾，身智滅後不得說智，故前說之。小乘如是。次就大論，分別有四：一約生死因果分別。分段、變易二種因盡，名曰有餘；二種果亡，稱曰無餘。故《地持》云「一切起因斷，諸餘畢竟滅，名般涅槃。」起因斷者，是其有餘；諸餘滅者，諸餘果亡，是其無餘。二約分段變易分別。分段因果盡無之處，滅不究竟，說為有餘；變易因果盡無之處，滅中窮極，說為無餘。三分段因果及與變易因盡之處，目曰有餘；變易果盡，名曰無餘。第四偏約變易宣說。變易因盡，名曰有餘；變易果亡，說為無餘。分段因果盡無之處，判之為小，大中不論。有餘無餘二種涅槃，相別麁爾。 > Next, the fourth section analyzes the characteristics by opening and combining \[categories\]. As for nirvāṇa, it is the wondrous fruit of complete extinction of all Buddhas. Its essence exhausts true reality, and its meaning pervades the Dharma realm. Because its essence exhausts true reality, it wondrously transcends names and marks; because its meaning pervades the Dharma realm, its virtues are as complete as the dusts of calculation. Since virtues numerous as the dusts of calculation are difficult to define categorically, the sūtras speak of them as one, two, or even manifold. Regarding the singular: bringing it under a comprehensive summary, the single great nirvāṇa has an essence that contains manifold meanings and fully embraces all things. Or it is spoken of as two. The twofold has three gates: first, the pair of with-remainder and without-remainder; second, the pair of original purity of nature and expedient means; third, the pair of the true and the response. Within the first pair, we first explain the names, and next distinguish their characteristics. What are the names? Concerning with-remainder and without-remainder, the conceptual explanation has two \[approaches\]: First, distinguishing them by contrast. The point where afflictions are exhausted is named nirvāṇa; the two names are established in contrast to body and wisdom. When the holy person of the stage of non-learning has completely exhausted afflictions, looking ahead, there is still the remaining body and wisdom existing; distinguishing the earlier in contrast to what remains later, the earlier is designated nirvāṇa with remainder. When the body and wisdom are completely exhausted, looking ahead, there is no further body and wisdom remaining; naming the earlier in looking to the later, the earlier is said to be nirvāṇa without remainder. The nirvāṇa with remainder and without remainder taught in the Abhidharma corresponds precisely to this meaning. This is the first, distinguishing by contrast. Second, distinguishing by mutual reference between the nirvāṇas themselves. In this gate, there are two nirvāṇas, taught fully in reference to the cause and fruit of saṃsāra: the exhaustion of the cause of saṃsāra is one nirvāṇa, and the demise of the fruit of saṃsāra is one nirvāṇa. Based on that place where the cause of saṃsāra is exhausted, looking ahead, there is still the one nirvāṇa of the demise of the fruit of saṃsāra remaining; distinguishing the earlier in reference to the later, it is named with-remainder. When the fruit of saṃsāra has been completely extinguished, looking ahead, there is no other remaining nirvāṇa; this is spoken of as without-remainder. Just as this applies to the cause and fruit of saṃsāra, it likewise applies to the saṃsāra of divided sections and inconceivable transformation. Such are the names. Next is to distinguish their characteristics. Within this, there are three gates: first, distinguishing by contrasting the Great and Small \[Vehicles\]; second, distinguishing in terms of the Small \[Vehicle\]; third, distinguishing in terms of the Great \[Vehicle\]. Regarding the distinction contrasting the Great and Small: the nirvāṇa of the Hīnayāna is called with-remainder, and the nirvāṇa of the Mahāyāna is called without-remainder. This single meaning is as taught in the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra. Hence that text states: 'Saṃsāra is of two kinds: conditioned and unconditioned. Nirvāṇa is also of two kinds: with-remainder and without-remainder.' Saṃsāra of divided sections is called conditioned, and saṃsāra of inconceivable transformation is called unconditioned; these two are fully and extensively distinguished as in the previous discussion of the two saṃsāras. The place where conditioned saṃsāra is exhausted and non-existent: the nirvāṇa obtained is called with-remainder, because looking ahead, there is still remaining saṃsāra, and furthermore, there is still remaining nirvāṇa. The place where unconditioned saṃsāra is exhausted and non-existent: the nirvāṇa obtained is called without-remainder, because looking ahead, there is no further remaining saṃsāra, and furthermore, there is no other remaining nirvāṇa. Next, the second gate distinguishes \[them\] in terms of the Small \[Vehicle\]. Because the schools differ, their explanations vary. Some say: In the Abhidharma, the complete extinction of afflictions is named nirvāṇa with remainder, while being far freed from the bondage of conditions on the present recompense body is called nirvāṇa without remainder. This meaning is not correct. One's own afflictions bind all internal and external objective realms universally; when the holy person of non-learning first attains the fruit, this bondage is already severed, but at that time it is not named nirvāṇa without remainder. It is only after the present body and wisdom pass away and cease that one first begins to proclaim nirvāṇa without remainder. On what grounds can one say that the body being freed from the bondage of conditions is called without-remainder? If this is incorrect, what is correct? In the Abhidharma, the essence of nirvāṇa is one, receiving two names according to different contrasts. Regarding the essence being one: in this school, when afflictional karmic volitions, through the power of the path, ought to arise but do not arise, this analytical cessation unconditioned is the essence of nirvāṇa; this essence is one. Receiving two names in contrast to body and wisdom: when body and wisdom are not yet exhausted, the former nirvāṇa is spoken of as with-remainder, because looking ahead, there is still remaining body and wisdom; when body and wisdom are completely exhausted, the aforesaid nirvāṇa shifts its name to without-remainder, because looking ahead, there is no further remaining body and wisdom. Question: At the point where body and wisdom are exhausted and non-existent, for what reason is it not named nirvāṇa? \[Answer:\] In that school, when body and wisdom arise and then pass away, this is impermanent cessation, and therefore is not nirvāṇa. Because the cause has been severed, future fruits do not arise; this is non-analytical cessation, and therefore is not nirvāṇa. If one relies on the Tattvasiddhi, the essences of nirvāṇa are two: the exhaustion of the cause of saṃsāra is one nirvāṇa, and the exhaustion of the fruit of saṃsāra is one nirvāṇa; thus there are two kinds. Question: Why is it that in the Abhidharma the exhaustion of the fruit of saṃsāra is not named nirvāṇa, whereas in the Tattvasiddhi it is? Answer: The Abhidharma seeks among natures and characteristics; what is directly severed by the path is named analytical cessation, while what is not directly severed is not analytical cessation. Bodily and verbal karma as well as the fruits of saṃsāra are not directly severed by the path; therefore, they are not analytical cessation, and thus are not named nirvāṇa. In the Tattvasiddhi, the understanding of the meaning is broader: because afflictions are severed, karmic fruits do not arise, and by tracing back to their root, this is also analytical cessation; thus it is spoken of as nirvāṇa. How is this known? As the Tattvasiddhi says: 'Dharmas severed by seeing are the mark-manifesting conceit of self and all other dharmas arisen therefrom. Dharmas severed by cultivation are the non-mark-manifesting conceit and all other dharmas arisen therefrom.' Afflictions severed by realization are called the mark-manifesting conceit; 'manifesting' is like seeing. Grasping and seeing fixed marks of self, person, and sentient beings is named 'manifesting marks.' Grasping the self and looking down on others is called 'conceit.' The karma and suffering fruit arisen based on this are called 'all other dharmas arisen therefrom.' By severing the delusions of seeing, these are prevented from arising; hence all are called severed by seeing. Afflictions severed by cultivation are called non-mark-manifesting conceit. What is severed by the path of cultivation are dull afflictions. Not grasping fixed marks of self, person, and sentient beings is called 'non-mark-manifesting.' In a deluded and obscure mind, relying on self to look down on others is designated 'conceit.' The karma and suffering fruit arisen based on this are called 'all other dharmas arisen therefrom.' By severing the delusions of cultivation, these are prevented from arising; hence all are called severed by cultivation. Because karma and the suffering fruit are severed by seeing and cultivation, they are named analytical cessation. Because they are analytical cessation, the exhaustion of the fruit of saṃsāra obtains the name nirvāṇa. Such are the two kinds. Attaining these two nirvāṇas is not fixed: it may be simultaneous, or it may be sequential. If one severs the present cause so that the future fruit is definitively unborn, this is called without-remainder. This cessation without remainder and the cessation with remainder can occur at the same time, because two meanings are complete in a single moment. The wisdom that is able to exhaust \[them\] is also of two kinds: the wisdom that exhausts the cause of saṃsāra is called the wisdom of exhaustion, and the wisdom that severs the fruit of saṃsāra so that future ones do not arise is called the wisdom of non-arising. If a person of non-learning, using border-limit wisdom, curtails the recompense and takes cessation, this is called without-remainder. This cessation without remainder and the cessation with remainder can occur sequentially, because cessation without remainder is spoken of only when the recompense is exhausted. However, although the attainment of cessation without remainder is not fixed—being either earlier or later—the manifestation of the name is solely later. Why is this so? When the present recompense is not yet extinguished, it obstructs the non-arising of future recompense from being evident, so the name is not yet given. Question: If when the present recompense is not yet exhausted one cannot proclaim cessation without remainder, one should likewise not be able to proclaim the wisdom of non-arising. Since within wisdom one can proclaim the wisdom of non-arising, why is it that within cessation this alone is not permitted? Answer: In cessation, after body and wisdom are exhausted, the meaning of without-remainder is evident, so earlier it is hidden. Wisdom is not like this: after body and wisdom are extinguished, one cannot speak of wisdom, so it is spoken of earlier. Such is the Small Vehicle. Next, discussing in terms of the Great \[Vehicle\], there are four distinctions: First, distinguishing according to the cause and fruit of saṃsāra. The exhaustion of the two causes of divided sections and inconceivable transformation is named with-remainder; the demise of the two fruits is called without-remainder. Thus the Bodhisattvabhūmi states: 'The severance of all arising causes and the definitive extinction of all remainders are called parinirvāṇa.' Severance of arising causes is with-remainder; the extinction of all remainders means the demise of all remaining fruits, which is without-remainder. Second, distinguishing according to divided sections and inconceivable transformation. The point where the cause and fruit of divided sections are exhausted and non-existent is not ultimate cessation, and is spoken of as with-remainder; the point where the cause and fruit of transformation are exhausted and non-existent is the culmination of cessation, and is spoken of as without-remainder. Third, the point where the cause and fruit of divided sections and the cause of transformation are exhausted is designated with-remainder; the exhaustion of the fruit of transformation is named without-remainder. Fourth, speaking solely in reference to transformation. The exhaustion of the cause of transformation is named with-remainder; the demise of the fruit of transformation is spoken of as without-remainder. The point where the cause and fruit of divided sections are exhausted and non-existent is determined to belong to the Small \[Vehicle\] and is not discussed within the Great \[Vehicle\]. The distinction of the characteristics of the two nirvāṇas, with-remainder and without-remainder, is roughly thus. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 18.6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1851.18.6) - [Next: 18.8](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1851.18.8) - [Up: 18](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1851.18) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1851~en-mt.18.7) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (2) - [大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.81.2) — Classical Chinese - [法華義疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1721.2.409) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1851.18.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1851.18.7) · Pramāṇa