[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) › [大乘法苑義林章](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1861) › 1.21.3 # 大乘法苑義林章 1.21.3 大乘法苑義林章 1.21.3 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.21.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1861.1.21.3) 」雖說一體，義不違三，即一一法各各有此四種體，故說諸法體。 准此應知，雖顯教體義有多途，而未解釋唯識教性。 如何說者識上聚集，令聽法者聚集解生？ 《顯揚論》中第十二說：有字非名謂一字，有名非句謂一字名，句必有名字，名亦必有字，字不必有名，名不必有句。 既大乘中於聲屈曲義說名等，故說名等非小乘義。 今准此義，釋說法者及聽法者識心之上聚集顯現。 如聖教說「諸惡者莫作，諸善者奉行，善調伏自心，是諸佛聖教。 」說「諸」字時，餘「惡」等字並在未來，唯有一字及依一字所成之名於心上現，此即一字成名之義。 亦有一字不成名者，非此所明。 復言「惡」時，餘「者」等字並在未來，其前諸字雖入過去、現無本質，由熏習力、唯識變力，仍於此念說「惡」字時心上顯現，即有二个一字、一个字身。 兩个一字所成名，一个一字所成名、名身，一个二字所成名。 又言「者」時，有三个一字，兩个字身，一謂「諸惡」、二謂「惡者」。 以二合說，下應准知。 不可隔越合，故無「諸者」合名字身。 一个三字多字身，三个一字所成名，二个一字所成名、名身。 如前字身二二合說，一个一字所成名、多名身。 論雖二說，今取三字名名多名身，不取四字者，下准應知。 兩个二字所成名，亦二二合說。 一个二字所成名、名身，一个三字所成名。 復言「莫」時，有四个一字，三个字身。 亦二二合說，準前應知。 兩个三字多字身，三三合說，更互除初後一字，一个四字多字身，四个一字所成名，三个一字所成名、名身，謂二二合說。 二个一字所成名三名多名身，謂三三合說，更互除初後一字。 一个一字所成名四名多名身。 三个二字所成名，謂二二合說。 二个二字所成名、名身。 一个二字所成名多名身。 二个三字所成名，更互除初後一字，如前准說。 一个三字所成名名身，一个四字所成名。 又言「作」時，有五个一字，四个字身，謂二二合說。 三个三字多字身，二个四字多字身，一个五字多字身。 至此總合字及字身并多字身，有一十五：五个一字所成名； 四个一字所成名名身，謂二二合說； 三个一字所成名三名多名身，謂三三合說； 二个一字所成名四名多名身，更互除初後一字； 一个一字所成名五名多名身； 四个二字所成名，謂二二合說； 三个二字所成名名身； 二个二字所成名三名多名身； 一个二字所成名四名多名身； 三个三字所成名，謂三三合說； 二个三字所成名名身； 一个三字所成名多名身； 二个四字所成名，更互除初後一字； 一个四字所成名名身； 一个五字所成名。 至此總合名及名身并多名身，有三十五。 合有一句，義究竟故。 梵云阿耨瑟多掣陀，即八字成句，不長不短，以圓滿故。 此中皆取無間相合方成名等，不可隔越合成名等，所隔之字即無用故。 此中且依倍倍增長而作其法，合有五剎那所依之聲於心上現，不可為難。 此依一句事究竟說。 字、名、句、聲都合尚有五十聚集，若約一頌、一段、一卷、一部聚集字名句等，理即無邊。 若薩婆多等說「惡」等字時，「諸」等字已滅，無聚集故次第而生，不俱時故、無熏習故不可至後。 前已所說字，於後心上現，故彼教義決定不成。 亦非由前字等勢力，末後字等能生顯名。 過去無體又無熏習，由何勢力，末後之字能生顯名等？ 故我今時，其說法者若在因位，及諸聽者亦在因中，由初「諸」字等熏本識已，連帶緣後「惡」者等字，識上解生。 乃至末後「作」字之時，先皆聚集，由前熏習後識之上聚集顯現，詮所詮義差別圓滿，名為說法，說為聞教。 若是佛說，雖無熏習亦聚集生，故雖無過，未唯識教成立。 說者、聽者義皆圓滿，俱以聲、字二種究竟於自心上聚集顯現，為教體故。 > "\[…\]" Although one essence is spoken of, its meaning does not contradict the three; that is, each single dharma individually possesses these four kinds of essences, and therefore they are spoken of as the essences of all dharmas. In accordance with this, one should know: although many approaches have been shown concerning the essence of the teaching, the nature of the teaching according to mere-consciousness has not yet been explained. How is it that an aggregation occurs upon the consciousness of the speaker, causing an aggregated understanding to arise in the listener? Fascicle twelve of the Xianyang \[shengjiao\] lun states: "There are phonemes that are not words, namely a single phoneme. There are words that are not phrases, namely a single-phoneme word. A phrase necessarily contains words and phonemes; a word also necessarily contains phonemes. A phoneme does not necessarily contain words; a word does not necessarily contain phrases." Since in the Mahāyāna, words and so forth are spoken of metaphorically based on the inflections of sound, the exposition of words and so forth is not the Hinayāna doctrine. Now, relying on this doctrine, we explain the aggregation and manifestation that occurs upon the consciousnesses of the speaker and listener of the Dharma. As the sacred teaching states: "Do no evil, / Practice all good, / Completely subdue one's own mind: / This is the teaching of all Buddhas." When the phoneme "all" (諸) is spoken, the remaining phonemes such as "evil" (惡) are all still in the future; only a single phoneme and the word formed relying on that single phoneme manifest in the mind: this is the meaning of a single phoneme forming a word. There are also single phonemes that do not form words, which is not what is being clarified here. When "evil" is further spoken, the remaining phonemes such as "that which" (者) are all in the future; although the preceding phoneme has entered the past and currently lacks an intrinsic entity, through the power of habituation and the power of transformation by mere-consciousness, it nevertheless manifests in the mind at this moment when the phoneme "evil" is spoken. Thus, there are two single phonemes and one phoneme-body (akṣara-kāya); two words formed of a single phoneme, one word-body (nāma-kāya) formed of single-phoneme words, and one word formed of two phonemes. Again, when "that which" (者) is spoken, there are three single phonemes and two phoneme-bodies: one being "all evil" and the second being "evil-that which". They are spoken of by combining pairs, which should be understood below accordingly. They cannot be combined across an interval; thus, there is no phoneme-body or word combining "all" and "that which". There is one multi-phoneme-body of three phonemes; three words formed of a single phoneme; two word-bodies formed of single-phoneme words, spoken of in pairs as with the phoneme-bodies above; and one multi-word-body formed of single-phoneme words. Although the treatises offer two explanations, we now take three words to be called a multi-word-body and do not take four words, as should be understood below. There are two words formed of two phonemes, also spoken of by combining pairs; one word-body formed of two-phoneme words; and one word formed of three phonemes. Again, when "not" (莫) is spoken, there are four single phonemes and three phoneme-bodies, also spoken of by combining pairs, as should be understood from the above. There are two multi-phoneme-bodies of three phonemes, spoken of by combining triplets, mutually excluding the first and last phonemes; one multi-phoneme-body of four phonemes; four words formed of a single phoneme; three word-bodies formed of single-phoneme words, meaning spoken of by combining pairs; two multi-word-bodies of three words formed of single-phoneme words, meaning spoken of by combining triplets, mutually excluding the first and last phonemes; one multi-word-body of four words formed of single-phoneme words; three words formed of two phonemes, meaning spoken of by combining pairs; two word-bodies formed of two-phoneme words; one multi-word-body of two-phoneme words; two words formed of three phonemes, mutually excluding the first and last phonemes, as explained above; one word-body formed of three-phoneme words; and one word formed of four phonemes. Again, when "do" (作) is spoken, there are five single phonemes and four phoneme-bodies, meaning spoken of by combining pairs; three multi-phoneme-bodies of three phonemes; two multi-phoneme-bodies of four phonemes; and one multi-phoneme-body of five phonemes. Up to this point, there are altogether fifteen phonemes, phoneme-bodies, and multi-phoneme-bodies: five words formed of a single phoneme; four word-bodies formed of single-phoneme words, meaning spoken of by combining pairs; three multi-word-bodies of three words formed of single-phoneme words, meaning spoken of by combining triplets; two multi-word-bodies of four words formed of single-phoneme words, mutually excluding the first and last phonemes; one multi-word-body of five words formed of single-phoneme words; four words formed of two phonemes, meaning spoken of by combining pairs; three word-bodies formed of two-phoneme words; two multi-word-bodies of three words formed of two-phoneme words; one multi-word-body of four words formed of two-phoneme words; three words formed of three phonemes, meaning spoken of by combining triplets; two word-bodies formed of three-phoneme words; one multi-word-body of three-phoneme words; two words formed of four phonemes, mutually excluding the first and last phonemes; one word-body formed of four-phoneme words; and one word formed of five phonemes. Up to this point, there are altogether thirty-five words, word-bodies, and multi-word-bodies. Together, there is one phrase, because the meaning is fully completed. In Sanskrit it is called anuṣṭubh, which consists of eight syllables forming a verse quarter, neither too long nor too short, on account of its completeness. In this context, it is only through uninterrupted combination that words and so forth are formed; they cannot be formed into words and so forth by leaping across an interval, because the intervening phonemes would then be rendered useless. Here, we provisionally formulate the method based on progressive doubling; sounds that serve as the basis for five moments manifest in the mind, which should not be objected to. This is explained on the basis of a single phrase having its meaning completed. Phonemes, words, phrases, and sounds together still yield fifty aggregations; if considered in terms of a stanza, a section, a fascicle, or an entire collection, the aggregations of phonemes, words, phrases, and so forth would theoretically be limitless. If, as the Sarvāstivādins and others hold, when phonemes such as "evil" are spoken, phonemes such as "all" have already ceased, then because there is no aggregation, they arise sequentially; because they are not simultaneous and because there is no habituation, they cannot reach what comes after. The phonemes already spoken appear in the subsequent mind; therefore, their doctrine of the teaching definitely cannot be established. Nor is it through the potency of preceding phonemes that the final phoneme can produce and manifest a word. The past lacks an intrinsic entity and furthermore has no habituation; through what potency could the final phoneme produce and manifest a word and so forth? Therefore, in our present system, when the speaker of the Dharma is in the causal stage and the listeners are also in the causal stage, because the initial phoneme "all" has habituated the fundamental consciousness, subsequent phonemes such as "evil" and "that which" are cognized in connection with it, and understanding arises upon the consciousness. Down to the final phoneme "do", the earlier ones have all aggregated; through the earlier habituation, they aggregate and manifest upon the subsequent consciousness, and the distinctions of the expressed meaning are completed: this is called expounding the Dharma and is spoken of as hearing the teaching. If it is the Buddha's exposition, although there is no habituation, they also arise in aggregation; therefore, although there is no error, the mere-consciousness teaching is established. The meaning for both the speaker and the listener is completely fulfilled: both attain culmination through the two matters of sound and phonemes, which aggregate and manifest upon their own minds, serving as the essence of the teaching. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.21.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1861.1.21.2) - [Next: 1.21.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1861.1.21.4) - [Up: 1.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1861.1.21) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1861~en-mt.1.21.3) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1861.1.21.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1861.1.21.3) · Pramāṇa