翻譯名義集 5.77

5.77

《瑜伽》云：「佛菩薩等是能說者，語是能說相，名句文身是所說相。」《成唯識論》云：「名詮自性，句詮差別，文即是字，為二所依。此非色心，屬不相應行，名曰三假。」《婆沙》問云：「如是佛教以何為體？」答：「一云語業為體。謂佛語言、唱詞、評論、語音、語論、語業、語表，是為佛教，此語業師也。二云名等為體。名身句身文身次第行列，安布聯合為名句文。云何但以聲為教體？此名句師也。語業師難曰：『名句文但顯佛教作用，非是自體。』名句師難曰：『聲是色法，如何得為教體？要由有名，乃說為教。』是故佛教體即是名，名能詮義，故名為體。」二師異見，氷執不通，《正理論》中雙存兩義。故《正理鈔》云：「案上二說，各有所歸。諸論皆有兩家，未聞決判。西方傳說，具乃無虧。何者？若以教攝機，非聲無以可聽；若以詮求旨，非名無以表彰。故《俱舍》云：『牟尼說法蘊，數有八十千，彼體語或名，是色行蘊攝。』體即教體，語即語業，名謂名句。言是色行蘊者，由聲屬乎不可見有對色，在色蘊收。名句屬不相應行，在行蘊攝。體既通於色行，則顯能詮之教，聲名句文四法和合方能詮理。又復須知，佛世滅後二體不同，若約佛世八音四辯梵音聲相，此是一實。名句文身乃是聲上屈曲建立，此三是假。若約滅後眾聖結集，西域貝葉、東夏竹帛書寫聖教，其中所載名句文身咸屬色法。此則從正別分。若乃就旁通說，佛世雖正屬聲旁亦通色。如迦旃延撰集眾經要義呈佛印可，斯乃通色。滅後正雖用色旁亦通聲，以假四依說方可解。作此區別教體明矣。」《瑜伽論》云：「諸契經體，略有二種：一文，二義。文是所依，義是能依。」〈十住品〉云：「文隨於義，義隨於文。文義相隨，理無舛謬，方為真教。」此敘體竟。

The Yogācārabhūmi states: "Buddhas, bodhisattvas, and others are those capable of expounding; speech is the characteristic of expounding; and collections of names, phrases, and phonemes are the characteristics of what is expounded." The Cheng weishi lun states: "Names express intrinsic nature; phrases express distinctions; phonemes are syllables, which serve as the support for both. These are neither matter nor mind, but belong to formations non-associated [with mind], and are called the three nominal entities." The Vibhāṣā asks: "What is the essence of such Buddhist teaching?" It answers: "One view holds that vocal action is its essence. That is, the Buddha's spoken words, chanting, discussion, vocal sounds, spoken discourses, vocal actions, and vocal representations constitute the Buddhist teaching; these are the masters of vocal action. The second view holds that names and so forth are its essence. Collections of names, collections of phrases, and collections of phonemes are arranged in sequence, deployed, and combined to form names, phrases, and phonemes. How could sound alone be the essence of the teaching? These are the masters of names and phrases. The masters of vocal action object, saying: 'Names, phrases, and phonemes merely display the function of the Buddhist teaching, but are not its intrinsic essence.' The masters of names and phrases object, saying: 'Sound is a material dharma; how could it be the essence of the teaching? Only through the presence of names is it expounded as teaching.' Therefore, the essence of the Buddhist teaching is simply names; names are capable of expressing meaning, and are hence called the essence." Because the two masters had differing views and held stubbornly to their opinions without compromise, the Nyāyānusāra preserves both positions. Thus the Zhenglichao states: "Investigating the two explanations above, each has its basis. All treatises feature these two schools, and no definitive judgment has been heard. According to traditions in the Western regions, both are completely retained without deficiency. Why? If teaching is used to receive faculties, without sound it could not be heard; if expression is used to seek the intended meaning, without names it could not be manifested. Thus the Abhidharmakośa states: 'The Muni expounded eighty thousand aggregates of Dharma; their essence is speech or names, subsumed under the matter or formations aggregates.' 'Essence' refers to the essence of the teaching; 'speech' refers to vocal action; 'names' refers to names and phrases. Saying they are subsumed under the matter and formations aggregates means that sound belongs to invisible, resistant matter, subsumed under the matter aggregate. Names and phrases belong to non-associated formations, subsumed under the formations aggregate. Since the essence encompasses both matter and formations, it demonstrates that for the teaching capable of expression, the four dharmas of sound, name, phrase, and phoneme must combine together in order to express principle. Furthermore, one must know that the two essences differ during the Buddha's lifetime and after his extinction: if considered according to the Buddha's lifetime, the characteristics of the Brahmā sounds of the eight tones and four eloquences are a single real entity. Collections of names, phrases, and phonemes are established through modulations upon sound; these three are nominal entities. If considered according to the compilation by the sages after his extinction, when palm leaves in the Western regions and bamboo and silk in the Eastern land were used to transcribe the sacred teachings, the collections of names, phrases, and phonemes recorded therein all belong to material dharmas. This is to distinguish them strictly according to primary attribution. If speaking according to inclusive attribution: although sound was primary during the Buddha's lifetime, it also inclusively encompassed matter. For example, when Kātyāyana compiled the essential meanings of the sutras and presented them to the Buddha for approval, this encompassed matter. Although matter is primary after his extinction, it also inclusively encompasses sound, for it can only be understood through the explanations of the four nominal reliances. Making this distinction clarifies the essence of the teaching." The Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra states: "The essence of all sūtras is briefly of two kinds: first, phonemes; second, meaning. Phonemes are what is relied upon, and meaning is that which relies." The "Ten Abodes Chapter" states: "Phonemes follow meaning, and meaning follows phonemes. When phonemes and meaning follow each other and principle is free from error, only then is it the true teaching." This concludes the account of the essence.