肇論 1.57

1.57

無名曰：經稱有餘涅槃、無餘涅槃者，秦言無為，亦名滅度。無為者，取乎虛無寂寞，妙絕於有為。滅度者，言其大患永滅，超度四流。斯蓋是鏡像之所歸，絕稱之幽宅也。而曰有餘、無餘者，良是出處之異號，應物之假名耳。余嘗試言之。夫涅槃之為道也，寂寥虛矌，不可以形名得；微妙無相，不可以有心知。超群有以幽升，量太虛而永久，隨之弗得其蹤，迎之罔眺其首，六趣不能攝其生，力負無以化其體。潢漭惚恍，若存若往，五目不覩其容，二聽不聞其響。冥冥窈窅，誰見誰曉？彌綸靡所不在，而獨曳於有無之表。然則言之者失其真，知之者反其愚，有之者乖其性，無之者傷其軀。所以釋迦掩室於摩竭，淨名杜口於毘耶，須菩提唱無說以顯道，釋梵絕聽而雨華；斯皆理為神御，故口以之而默，豈曰無辯？辯所不能言也。經云：「真解脫者，離於言數，寂滅永安，無始無終，不晦不明，不寒不暑，湛若虛空，無名無說。」論曰：「涅槃非有，亦復非無。言語道斷，心行處滅。」尋夫經論之作，豈虛搆哉？果有其所以不有，故不可得而有；有其所以不無，故不可得而無耳。何者？本之有境，則五陰永滅；推之無鄉，而幽靈不竭。幽靈不竭，則抱一湛然；五陰永滅，則萬累都捐。萬累都捐，故與道通洞；抱一湛然，故神而無功。神而無功，故至功常存；與道通洞，故沖而不改。沖而不改，故不可為有；至功常存，故不可為無。然則有無絕於內，稱謂淪於外，視聽之所不暨，四空之所昏昧，恬焉而夷，怕焉而泰，九流於是乎交歸，眾聖於是乎冥會。斯乃希夷之境、太玄之鄉。而欲以有無題榜，標其方域而語其神道者，不亦邈哉！

Nameless says: What the sūtras call nirvāṇa with remainder and nirvāṇa without remainder is called in the language of Qin non-action (asaṃskṛta), and is also called parinirvāṇa. 'Non-action' is taken from voidness, non-being, and stillness, subtly transcending the conditioned (saṃskṛta). 'Parinirvāṇa' means that the great afflictions are permanently extinguished, crossing beyond the four currents. This is indeed that to which mirror-images return, the dark abode beyond all appellation. That they are called 'with remainder' and 'without remainder' is truly just different designations for manifestation and retirement, conventional names corresponding to things. Let me attempt to speak of it: The way of nirvāṇa is solitary, vacant, and vast, impossible to grasp through form or name; subtle and ānimitta, impossible to know through a dualistic mind. Transcending the multitude of existents to ascend in darkness, rivaling the Great Void in longevity; following it, one cannot obtain its traces; meeting it, one cannot view its head. The six destinies cannot embrace its birth; powerful forces have no means to transform its substance. Boundless, indistinct, as if existing, as if passing away, the five eyes do not behold its form; the two hearings do not hear its sound. Obscure and deep, who sees it, who comprehends it? Encompassing all, there is nowhere it is not present, yet it moves alone beyond being and non-being. Therefore, one who speaks of it loses its reality; one who knows it turns into its fool; one who posits it as existing violates its nature; one who posits it as non-existing harms its embodiment. Thus Śākyamuni closed his chamber in Magadha, Vimalakīrti stopped his mouth in Vaiśālī, Subhūti proclaimed non-exposition to reveal the Dao, and Indra and Brahmā ceased listening and rained down flowers. In all these cases, principle guided the spirit, so the mouth became silent on account of it. How could one say they lacked eloquence? It was eloquence regarding that which cannot be spoken. A sūtra says: 'True liberation is free from words and numbers, extinguished, peaceful, and eternally secure, without beginning or end, neither dark nor bright, neither cold nor hot, clear as empty space, without name and without exposition.' A treatise says: 'Nirvāṇa is not existent, nor is it non-existent. The path of words is cut off; the place of the mind's operation is extinguished.' When we examine the composition of sūtras and treatises, are they empty fabrications? Truly, it has that whereby it is not existent, so it cannot be obtained as existent; it has that whereby it is not non-existent, so it cannot be obtained as non-existent. Why is this? If one traces it back to the realm of being, the pañca-skandha are permanently extinguished; if one pursues it to the land of non-being, the dark spirit is inexhaustible. If the dark spirit is inexhaustible, it embraces the One in lucidity; if the pañca-skandha are permanently extinguished, myriad entanglements are completely abandoned. Because myriad entanglements are completely abandoned, it permeates and penetrates the Dao; because it embraces the One in lucidity, it is spiritual without effort. Because it is spiritual without effort, its utmost efficacy is ever-present; because it permeates and penetrates the Dao, it is empty yet unaltering. Because it is empty yet unaltering, it cannot be deemed existent; because its utmost efficacy is ever-present, it cannot be deemed non-existent. Thus, being and non-being are cut off within, and appellations sink away without; where seeing and hearing cannot reach, and where the four formless attainments are obscured. Tranquil and peaceful, placid and serene, the nine currents here converge, and the myriad sages here mysteriously unite. This is indeed the realm of the inaudible and invisible, the home of the Great Mystery. Yet to wish to label it with being and non-being, demarcate its boundaries, and speak of its spiritual path—is that not far wide of the mark!