[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) › [宗鏡錄](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016) › 34.4 # 宗鏡錄 34.4 宗鏡錄 34.4 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [34.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.34.4) 問。既經云。見諸行無常是斷見非正見。見涅槃常是常見非正見者。云何教中。或說無我。又說於我。豈不相違耶。 > Question: Since the sūtra says, 'Seeing conditioned processes as impermanent is an annihilationist view, not a right view; seeing nirvāṇa as permanent is an eternalist view, not a right view', why is it that in the teaching it is sometimes said there is no self, and sometimes said there is a self? Is this not contradictory? > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 34.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.34.3) - [Next: 34.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.34.5) - [Up: 34](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.34) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016~en-mt.34.4) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.34.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.34.4) · Pramāṇa