---
title: "涅槃經會疏 · 第二十四"
description: "涅槃經會疏是隋代高僧灌顶所撰，唐代湛然再治，日本僧人本纯分会的一部重要佛教注疏。该书以《大般涅槃经》为核心，系统阐释了涅槃思想，融合了南北朝至隋唐的佛学精华。内容涵盖佛性论、常乐我净、一阐提成佛等核心教义，对天台宗、华严宗等宗派影响深远。灌顶作为天台宗五祖，其注疏体现了智顗大师的思想体系，湛然再治后更显精要。该疏在汉传佛教史上具有重要地位，是研究涅槃思想与隋唐佛教的重要文献，尤其在日本佛教界备受尊崇。"
url: "https://rushiwowen.co/en/r/cmbeh6ein05qlk104at70n82f"
---
## 南本大般涅槃經會疏卷第二十四
> Dharmākaraṇa No. 24: The Greater Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, Southern Version, Fascicle
大般涅槃經高貴德王菩薩品之六卷第二十四
> Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, Chapter on the Bodhisattva Kṣitigarbha of Noble Virtue (Part Six)Fascicle 24
北涼 天竺三藏 曇無讖 譯
> Translated by Dharmakṣema, Tripiṭaka Master from India, Northern Liang Dynasty.
晉 沙門 慧嚴 慧觀謝靈運 重治
> Translated by the Jin Dynasty Monks Huiyan and Huiguan, with revisions by Xie Lingyun.
德王品之六
> \*\*Chapter on the Virtuous King, Part Six\*\*
起卷第九功德開善云第一至第六始不聞聞至金心第七第八始於善友至慧解脫第九第十始於信心至三十七品此卷即是第三周又有師言不爾而此十德兩兩莊嚴前之五行乍淺乍深今皆不然前五行是修今十德是證證中功德淺深非一若爾何以前深後淺答亦有此義如初功德已言不與聲聞辟支佛共最後而言三十七品聞道品名謂其初淺論其義理超絕二乘云云於中先標次釋三結初標如文。
> Chapter Nine: "Regarding the opening of the Ninth Scroll, the Good Deeds commentary states that the first and second virtues begin with the Unheard Hearing and extend to the Diamond Mind. The seventh and eighth virtues begin with the Good Friend and extend to the Liberation of Wisdom. The ninth and tenth virtues begin with Faith and extend to the Thirty-Seven Factors of Enlightenment. This chapter constitutes the third cycle. Another teacher argues that this is not the case, contending that these ten virtues adorn each other in pairs. They claim that the previous Five Practices alternate between shallow and deep, but that view is mistaken. In reality, the earlier Five Practices are about cultivation, while these ten virtues are about realization. Within realization, the depth of virtues is not uniform. If so, the question arises: why does the text move from deep to shallow? The answer is that this is also valid. For instance, the first virtue already states that it is not shared with Hearers or Solitary Realizers, while the last one discusses the Thirty-Seven Factors. Hearing the term 'Factors of Enlightenment' might suggest that it is shallow at the beginning, but when examined philosophically, its meaning surpasses that of the Two Vehicles. Then the text first outlines, then explains, and finally concludes. The first outline is as in the text."
復次善男子云何菩薩摩訶薩修大涅槃微妙經典具足成就第九功德。
> Furthermore, Good Man, how does the Bodhisattva-Mahasattva cultivate the sublime Great Nirvana Sutra and fully achieve the ninth merit?
次釋中為二初明五事次論義初又三一列二釋三歎初文二先徵。
> Now, the Explanation Section is divided into two parts: 1. Clarifying the Five Matters 2. Discussing the Meaning The first part has three subdivisions: 1. Listing 2. Explaining 3. Praising Within the listing subsection, there are two parts: first, a question is raised.
善男子菩薩摩訶薩修大涅槃微妙經典初發五事悉得成就何等為五。
> Noble son, when a Bodhisattva-Mahasattva cultivates the profound Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, they will perfectly accomplish five things from the very beginning. What are these five?
次列名者。
> I will now list their names:
一者信二者直心三者戒四者親近善友五者多聞。
> First is faith; second is a straightforward mind; third is ethical discipline; fourth is associating with virtuous friends; fifth is extensive learning.
信由內發得見聖性直起中懷不為緣由戒是性戒全具菩提聞於不說如此五事多就理明豈可言淺在文可見。
> Faith arises from within, revealing the sacred nature; it springs directly from the heart, not from external conditions. Precepts are the inherent precepts of one's own nature, fully embodying bodhi. Listen without being spoken to. These five matters are largely understood through principle—how could they be called shallow? This is evident in the text.
云何為信下第二解釋即為五章初信又三前出信體次釋信德三結初信體者。
> What is faith? The second main section explains this, and is divided into five chapters. The first chapter discusses faith, which is further divided into three parts: First, it presents the essence of faith; Second, it explains the qualities of faith; Third, it concludes the initial understanding of faith. The essence of faith is as follows.
云何為信菩薩摩訶薩信於三寶施有果報信於二諦一乘之道更無異趣為諸眾生速得解脫諸佛菩薩分別為三信第一義諦信善方便是名為信。
> What is faith? For a great bodhisattva, faith means trusting in the Three Jewels and believing that giving brings results. They have faith in the two truths and the single vehicle path—there is no other way. To help all beings quickly attain liberation, the Buddhas and bodhisattvas make this division into three: faith in the ultimate truth, faith in the good means to reach it. This is what is called faith.
信何等法凡舉五種一信三寶二信因果三信二諦四信一乘五信三諦一師云信第一義是信真信善方便是信俗一師云前已二諦竟何容重說依華嚴經云若歎菩薩作二智名若歎佛者作二身名只是一體隱顯為異有言第一義諦善方便者即是二身亦是二智今明此文自稱第一義諦何容改諦為智復改為身今作三諦自異二諦不成重說而文約一乘顯其信意為眾生故分別說三知無異趣是故說一準此一條例通四法三寶亦爾為眾生故分別二體知歸至極故說一體因果亦爾為眾生故說因致果至於彼岸無施無受二諦三諦亦復如是。
> Faith in what teachings? Generally, there are five: 1) Faith in the Three Jewels, 2) Faith in cause and effect, 3) Faith in the Two Truths, 4) Faith in the One Vehicle, and 5) Faith in the Three Truths. One teacher says: "Faith in the Supreme Truth is faith in ultimate reality; faith in skillful means is faith in conventional reality." Another teacher says: "We have already covered the Two Truths, so why repeat them?" According to the \*Avatamsaka Sutra\*, when praising a bodhisattva, the Two Wisdoms are used; when praising a Buddha, the Two Bodies are used. It is the same reality, only distinguished by whether it is hidden or revealed. Some say, "The Supreme Truth and skillful means refer to the Two Bodies and the Two Wisdoms." But this text itself states "The Supreme Truth and skillful means." Why change "truth" to "wisdom" and then to "body"? Now, by presenting the Three Truths as distinct from the Two Truths, this is not a repetition. The text centers on the One Vehicle to reveal the nature of faith. Because of sentient beings, the teachings are distinguished into three, but knowing there is no separate goal, the One is taught. Following this principle, it can be applied to all four other teachings as well: The Three Jewels are the same. For the sake of beings, their bodies are separately distinguished, yet knowing the ultimate refuge, the one body is taught. Cause and effect are the same. For the sake of beings, cause is taught to lead to effect, yet upon reaching the far shore, there is neither giving nor receiving. The same holds true for the Two Truths and the Three Truths.
次如是信者下釋信德。
> The meaning here explains the virtue of faith.
如是信者若諸沙門若婆羅門若天魔梵一切眾生所不能壞因是信故得聖人性修行布施若多若少悉得近於大般涅槃不墮生死戒聞智慧亦復如是是名為信雖有是信而亦不見。
> One who possesses such faith cannot be corrupted by any mendicants, Brahmins, gods, demons, or other beings. Because of this faith, they attain the nature of the noble ones. Whether they give much or little in charity, their practice brings them closer to Great Nirvāṇa and keeps them from falling back into the cycle of birth and death. The same is true for their precepts, learning, and wisdom. This is what is called faith. Yet, even with this faith, they do not cling to it as something to be seen.
釋有四意相次而來此信堅固無能壞者何故不壞得聖人性以為根本即是見性之信深固難拔以根深故即能增長近大涅槃成就戒等初一切諸法從於聖性近大涅槃即是豎高戒聞智慧等即是橫廣雖有橫豎深廣之異而亦不見橫豎之相彌著彌亡如此明信那忽云淺。
> The teaching has four meanings that follow one after another. This faith is firm and indestructible—why is it unbreakable? Because it has achieved the nature of a saint as its foundation. This is precisely the faith that sees one's true nature, deep and secure, hard to uproot. Because the roots are deep, it can grow, drawing near to the great Nirvana and perfecting precepts, learning, and wisdom. Initially, all things arise from the saintly nature. Drawing near to great Nirvana means vertical depth; precepts, learning, and wisdom mean horizontal breadth. Although there is a difference between vertical depth and horizontal breadth, one does not perceive the characteristics of either depth or breadth. The more one focuses, the more it fades away. How can such clear faith be considered shallow?
三結如文。
> The three fetters are as described in the text.
是為菩薩修大涅槃成就初事。
> This is a Bodhisattva's cultivation of the Great Nirvana, accomplishing the first stage.
云何直心釋第二事又三標釋結初標如文。
> Explanation of "Upright Mind" (Part Two) \[Three-fold Structure: Label, Explanation, Conclusion — The initial label is as stated in the text.\]
云何直心。
> What is an upright mind?
次釋中文為兩初以不諂為直後以懺悔為直初明不諂中二先釋次論義初中二初正釋次釋疑初文者。
> Now, I will explain the meaning of "directness" in Chinese, which has two stages. \*\*First Stage: Directness through integrity (without flattery).\*\* \*\*Second Stage: Directness through repentance.\*\* \*\*Regarding the first stage of directness through integrity, there are two parts:\*\* 1. Explanation of the teaching 2. Discussion of its meaning \*\*In the explanation, there are again two sections:\*\* First, the main explanation. Second, clarifying doubts. \*\*Now, the text for the first section:\*\*
菩薩摩訶薩於諸眾生作質直心一切眾生若遇因緣則生諂曲菩薩不爾何以故善解諸法悉因緣故。
> The great bodhisattva-mahasattva maintains a straightforward heart toward all living beings. Ordinary beings, when faced with conditions, may become devious and crooked, but the bodhisattva does not do so. Why is that? Because the bodhisattva thoroughly understands that all things arise from causes and conditions.
以解因緣故不諂。
> Because they understand causes and conditions, they are without deceit.
次雖見惡下釋疑。
> Though it may seem flawed to the untrained eye, this clarifies doubt.
菩薩摩訶薩雖見眾生諸惡過咎終不說之何以故恐生煩惱若生煩惱則墮惡趣如是菩薩若見眾生有少善事則讚歎之云何為善所謂佛性讚佛性故令諸眾生發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心。
> A great enlightening being, even when seeing the faults and wrongdoings of sentient beings, never speaks of them. Why? For fear that doing so might cause those beings to give rise to afflictions. If afflictions arise, they will fall into unfortunate realms. So, when a bodhisattva sees even a small good deed in a sentient being, they praise it. What is this 'good'? It is the Buddha Nature itself. By praising the Buddha Nature, they inspire sentient beings to awaken the supreme, perfect, and enlightened mind.
左右解之初見惡不說後見善則歎疑者云見惡應說而不說者乃是不直何名直心即釋云恐生煩惱即復疑云既見惡不說見善亦應不說乃是直心次明不爾即釋云讚佛性故令得菩提。
> At first, when seeing evil, you do not speak of it. Later, when seeing good, you praise it. The doubt arises: “Seeing evil, one should speak, yet you do not—this is not uprightness. How can it be called an upright mind?” The explanation: “You fear it may give rise to afflictions.” Then the doubt continues: “If seeing evil is not spoken of, then seeing good should also not be spoken of—that would be an upright mind.” Next, it clarifies: “This is not the case.” The explanation: “Praising the Buddha-nature leads sentient beings to attain enlightenment.”
次論義中有問答初問有六而為三雙初兩從現病生彼明三種五種病人次兩從初功德生後兩從此文生就初兩中初一又為三先非佛旨。
> In this discussion, there is a question-and-answer section with six questions, which are grouped into three pairs. The first pair arises from the discussion of illness, clarifying three types and five types of patients. The next pair arises from the initial merits. The final pair arises from this text. Within the first pair, the first question is further divided into three parts. The first part states that this is not the original intention of the Buddha.
爾時光明徧照高貴德王菩薩摩訶薩白佛言世尊如佛所說菩薩摩訶薩讚歎佛性令無量眾生發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心是義不然。
> At that time, the great Bodhisattva Universally Radiant Light, Exalted and Virtuous King, said to the Buddha: "World-Honored One, as the Buddha has explained, the great Bodhisattva's praise of the Buddha Nature inspires countless beings to awaken the aspiration for supreme enlightenment. But I see a flaw in this teaching.
次領初開經時說。
> \[Then follows the first opening of the sutra at the time of recitation.\]
何以故如來初開涅槃經時說有三種一者若有病人得良醫藥及瞻病者病則易差如其不得則不可愈二者若得不得悉不可差三者若得不得悉皆自差一切眾生亦復如是若遇善友諸佛菩薩聞說妙法能發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心如其不遇則不能發所謂須陀洹斯陀含阿那含阿羅漢辟支佛二者雖遇善友諸佛菩薩聞說妙法亦不能發若其不遇亦不能發謂一闡提三者若遇不遇一切悉能發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心所謂菩薩。
> Why is this so? When the Tathāgata first taught the Nirvana Sutra, he described three categories: First, some patients who are sick may recover if they receive good medicine and proper care. If they do not receive these, they cannot be cured. Second, there are patients who cannot be cured regardless of whether they receive medicine and care or not. Third, there are patients who will recover on their own, whether they receive medicine and care or not. This is exactly the same for all living beings: The first category includes those who, if they encounter good spiritual friends, Buddhas, or Bodhisattvas and hear the wonderful Dharma, can arouse the resolve for supreme enlightenment. If they do not encounter such beings, they cannot arouse this resolve. This refers to stream-enterers, once-returners, non-returners, arhats, and pratyekabuddhas. The second category includes those who, even if they encounter good spiritual friends, Buddhas, or Bodhisattvas and hear the wonderful Dharma, still cannot arouse this resolve. And if they do not encounter them, they also cannot arouse it. This refers to icchantikas (those with severed good roots). The third category includes those who, whether they encounter such beings or not, will always arouse the resolve for supreme enlightenment. This refers to bodhisattvas.
若言遇不遇下第三正難。
> If you speak of encountering or not encountering \[conditions\], the third part begins the proper refutation.
若言遇與不遇悉發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心者如來今者云何說言因讚佛性令諸眾生發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心。
> If you say that whether or not they encounter the teaching, all beings will awaken the mind of supreme enlightenment, why then does the Tathagata now say that it is by praising the Buddha-nature that beings are led to awaken the mind of supreme enlightenment?
既能自發菩提之心何須歎於佛性令得菩提是取第三病人為難。
> One may ask: since the aspirant can already arouse the Bodhi-mind on their own, why is it necessary to praise the Buddha-nature in order to help them attain enlightenment? This dilemma is aimed at the third type of patient.
初中第二又兩先領旨仰非次正難。
> In the early second year of the Great Tang, two masters first received the imperial decree. They looked up with reverence, knowing that overcoming the obstacles ahead would not be easy.
世尊若遇善友諸佛菩薩聞說妙法及以不遇悉不能發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心當知是義亦復不然。
> World-Honored One, even if someone encounters good spiritual friends, Buddhas, or Bodhisattvas and hears the wondrous Dharma, or does not encounter them at all—it would be incorrect to assume that in either case they cannot awaken the mind set on supreme, perfect enlightenment. You should know that this understanding is also not valid.
何以故如是之人當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提故一闡提輩以佛性故若聞不聞悉亦當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提故。
> Why? Because such a person will attain Supreme Perfect Enlightenment. Even those without faith, icchantikas, because they possess the Buddha-nature, whether they hear (the Dharma) or not, will also ultimately attain Supreme Perfect Enlightenment.
明闡提人亦應發心何故爾其既有性應自發心何俟須歎此是取第二病人為難。
> A person of clear icchantika (incorrigible nature) should also arouse aspiration. Why is this? Since they possess inherent potential, they should naturally develop this aspiration on their own—why would they need to be praised? This point raises a difficulty using the second type of sick person as an analogy.
如佛所說下是第二兩難從初功德生第二十卷中明五難初兩難據四種罪人中兩難據闡提後一難據不定佛答中明佛性非內非外非常非無常所以不斷今還因此生問先領旨仰非。
> As the Buddha explained, the second section addresses two difficulties. In the twentieth scroll, five difficulties are clarified: the first two relate to four types of sinners, the middle two to icchantikas, and the final one to the undecided. In his response, the Buddha clarifies that Buddha-nature is neither inside nor outside, neither eternal nor impermanent, and thus cannot be annihilated. Building on this, a question arises—first acknowledging and affirming this teaching, then respectfully setting aside any prior misunderstandings.
世尊如佛所說何等名為一闡提謂斷善根如是之義亦復不然。
> World-Honored One, as the Buddha taught, what is called an icchantika—one who has cut off the roots of goodness—this principle is also not as it seems.
次正難。
> A true spiritual question is actually an opportunity for growth.
何以故不斷佛性故如是佛性理不可斷云何佛說斷諸善根。
> Why is this? Because the Buddha-nature is never cut off. For this reason, the principle of Buddha-nature cannot be destroyed. How, then, could the Buddha say that one might cut off all roots of goodness?
正言不斷佛性云何言斷善根只此佛性即是善根既其斷善根即斷佛性云何復言佛性非內非外。
> To speak of a "good root being cut off" while the Buddha-nature is spoken of as never being cut off—how is this to be understood? It is precisely this Buddha-nature that is itself the good root. So if the good root is cut off, that would mean the Buddha-nature is cut off. Yet how can it also be said that the Buddha-nature is neither inside nor outside?
如佛往昔下後難。
> As the Buddha previously descended and faced difficulties.
如佛往昔說十二部經善有二種一者常二者無常常者不斷無常者斷無常可斷故墮地獄常不可斷何故不遮佛性不斷非一闡提如來何故作如是說言一闡提。
> As the Buddha taught in the twelve categories of sutras, there are two types of goodness: the constant and the impermanent. The constant is unbreakable, while the impermanent is breakable. Because the impermanent can be broken, it can lead to falling into hell. But since the constant cannot be broken, why does it not prevent this? Buddha-nature is unbreakable, so it is not like the icchantika. Why, then, did the Tathagata teach that icchantikas are beyond redemption?
若佛性不斷何故不遮令不墮地獄既不斷佛性但斷善根由有佛性應能遮惡答未了故更論義。
> If the Buddha-nature is never cut off, why doesn’t it prevent beings from falling into hell? Since it is never cut off, but only cuts off the roots of goodness, and because the Buddha-nature is present, it should be able to block evil. Answer: You haven’t fully understood yet, so let’s discuss this further.
若因佛性下第三復有兩難近從此生。
> If one attempts to analyze "Buddha-nature" as a concept, two further difficulties arise, which stem directly from this understanding.
世尊若因佛性發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提何故如來廣為眾生說十二部經世尊譬如四河出阿耨達池若有天人諸佛世尊說言是河不入大海當還本源無有是處菩提之心亦復如是有佛性者若聞不聞若戒非戒若施非施若修不修若智非智悉皆應得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提世尊如優陀延山日從中出至于正南日若念言我不至西還東方者無有是處佛性亦爾若不聞不戒不施不修不智不得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提者無有是處。
> World-Honored One, if due to the Buddha-nature one can attain Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi (perfect enlightenment), why did the Tathagata broadly teach the twelve categories of scriptures for all beings? World-Honored One, it is like the four rivers that flow from the Anavatapta Lake. If celestial beings, humans, or Buddhas claimed that those rivers would not reach the great ocean but would return to their source, that would be impossible. The mind of enlightenment is just the same. Those with Buddha-nature, whether they hear the teachings or not, whether they observe precepts or not, whether they give or not, whether they cultivate or not, whether they are wise or not, all should attain Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi. World-Honored One, it is like the sun that rises from the Udumbara mountain and moves toward the south. If the sun said, "I will not go to the west but will return to the east," that would be impossible. The same is true of Buddha-nature: if one with it, despite not hearing, not observing precepts, not giving, not cultivating, or not being wise, could not attain Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi, that would be impossible.
若歎佛性令發心者何須復說十二部經直歎佛性其義自足有法有譬有合。
> If simply praising the Buddha-nature is enough to inspire people to awaken their aspiration for enlightenment, why bother teaching the twelve divisions of scriptures? If extolling the Buddha-nature directly sufficed, the meaning would be complete on its own. But the teachings include doctrines (principles), analogies, and their application.
諸佛如來下即是後難。
> Now I will answer the second question regarding the Tathāgatas, the Thus-Come Ones.
世尊諸佛如來說因果性非有非無如是之義是亦不然何以故如其乳中無酪性者則無有酪尼拘陀子無五丈性者則不能生五丈之質若佛性中無阿耨多羅三藐三菩提樹者云何能生阿耨多羅三藐三菩提樹以是義故所說因果非有非無如是之義云何相應。
> The World-Honored One stated that the Buddhas and Tathagatas speak of cause and effect as neither existing nor non-existing. However, even this interpretation is not ultimately correct. Why is that? Consider milk: if there were no inherent potential for curds within it, curds could never arise from milk. Similarly, if the nyagrodha seed contained no potential to grow into a five-span-tall tree, such a tree could not possibly emerge from it. In the same way, if the buddha-nature lacked the inherent potential for the tree of anuttara samyaksambodhi, how could that tree of perfect enlightenment ever arise from it? Therefore, the doctrine that cause and effect are neither existent nor non-existent—how can such a view be considered consistent with reality?
從第八功德佛答貪心非有非無非因非果或即因中有果或因中無果今還取此為難若爾乳應無酪樹無五丈若乳有酪樹有五丈者當知因中有果不得泛言或無。
> From the Eighth Meritorious Buddha, it was answered that greed neither exists nor does not exist; it is neither cause nor effect. It is not that the effect is present in the cause, nor that the effect is absent from the cause. Now you raise a difficulty based on this: “If that is so, then milk should not produce curds, and a tree sapling should not grow to five fathoms. But since milk does produce curds, and a sapling does grow to five fathoms, we must recognize that effects are present in their causes—we cannot freely say they are not.”
爾時世尊下佛答為二初讚次答初又二初讚問次舉五句歎其功用。
> At that time, the World-Honored One began his reply in two parts: first praise, then the answer. The praise was further divided into two: first, he praised the question, and second, he extolled its merits with five phrases.
爾時世尊讚言善哉善哉善男子世有二人甚為希有如優曇華一者不行惡法二者有罪能悔如是之人甚為希有復有二人一者作恩二者念恩復有二人一者咨受新法二者溫故不忘復有二人一者造新二者修故復有二人一樂聞法二樂說法復有二人一善問難二善能答善問難者汝身是也善能答者謂如來也。
> At that time, the World-Honored One praised him, saying, "Excellent, excellent, virtuous man. In this world, there are two kinds of people who are as rare as the udumbara flower: first, those who do no evil; second, those who can repent of their wrongdoings. Such people are truly rare. There are also two kinds of people: first, those who do good deeds; second, those who remember kindness. There are also two kinds of people: first, those who seek to learn new teachings; second, those who remember the old ones without forgetting. There are also two kinds of people: first, those who create new things; second, those who cultivate the old. There are also two kinds of people: first, those who delight in hearing the Dharma; second, those who delight in teaching it. There are also two kinds of people: first, those who skillfully ask questions; second, those who skillfully answer them. The one who asks well is you yourself; the one who answers well is the Tathagata."
初六種二人歎其能開發大眾能令得解非但能除現世者疑亦使未來無有滯礙實為希有是故歎之初兩人一者本不造惡二者作已能悔即是前二健兒第二知恩報恩他與我恩我復須報第三聽受新法二者直溫故不忘書云溫故而知新可以為師第四造創新好二者治葺故壞第五樂說樂聽若無說者聽何所聽若無聽者說為誰說第六能難能答正意在此二人前之五雙乃為弄胤善問是汝身善答即我是若無汝精問何得我善解無我巧答何得汝能問自有人身左能右能口辯通敏能主能客自有人專一無二昔莊嚴門下有淨藏法師唯能竝難答無所以有善解釋不便論義者即彭城正公云云今推前六雙成後五句能問能答能聽能說成後轉于法輪句造新修故成枯十二因緣大樹取有是新無明是故不生生是新世諦死時是故以新破新名造新以故破故名修故作恩念恩成度海句作恩為他舟航念恩自運舟航故成度海句不作惡悔惡成摧魔幢句魔以惡為幢今能倒之復自能建故前後相成。
> The initial six pairs praise these two individuals for inspiring the assembly, freeing people from doubt, resolving present uncertainties, and preventing future obstacles—truly a rare feat. First pair: One who never commits wrongdoings; one who repents after committing them. These are the two "strong ones" mentioned earlier. Second pair: One who acknowledges kindness and repays it; when others show me kindness, I must return it. Third pair: One who listens to and embraces new teachings; one who continually revisits old lessons without forgetting them. As the \*Book of Documents\* says: "Reviewing the old leads to understanding the new—this makes one a teacher." Fourth pair: One who creates new, fine things; one who repairs and restores the old and broken. Fifth pair: One who delights in speaking; one who delights in listening. Without a speaker, what would listeners hear? Without listeners, for whom would a speaker speak? Sixth pair: One who can raise sharp questions; one who can give precise answers. The true meaning lies in these two—the previous five pairs merely set the stage. "Skillful questioning is your body; skillful answering is my body." Without your profound questioning, how could my clear explanation arise? Without my adept answers, how could your questioning shine? Some people are versatile—good at left and right, eloquent and quick-witted, able to lead or follow. Others focus on one thing alone. In the past, under Master Zhuangyan's school, there was Dharma Master Jingzang, who could only ask and answer difficult questions without deeper interpretation—unlike Master Pengcheng Zheng, who excelled at explaining but not debating.etc. Now we extend these six pairs into five subsequent phrases: "able to question and able to answer," "able to listen and able to speak"—these complete the phrase "turn the Dharma wheel." "Creating new and restoring old" cuts down the great tree of the twelve links of dependent origination. "Taking" represents the new; "ignorance" represents the old. "Not born from birth" is the new; "worldly truth at the time of death" is the old. Thus, using the new to break the new is called "creating new," and using the old to break the old is called "restoring old." "Repaying kindness and remembering kindness" completes the phrase "crossing the ocean." "Repaying kindness" serves as a ferry for others; "remembering kindness" propels one's own ferry—hence the phrase "crossing the ocean." "No wrongdoing and repentance for wrongdoing" completes the phrase "tearing down Mara's banner." Mara uses wrongdoing as his banner; now we invert it—and then raise it again ourselves. Thus, the beginning and end complement each other.
歎生善即初一句歎滅惡即後四句。
> Praising the arising of goodness is in the first line; praising the cessation of evil is in the final four lines.
善男子因是善問即得轉于無上法輪。
> Good man, because of this excellent question, you will immediately set in motion the supreme wheel of Dharma.
既言因此善問即能轉於無上法輪寧非生善。
> Since it is said that by asking a good question one can turn the supreme wheel of Dharma, could this not mean that such a question gives rise to what is good?
後四句復為二初兩句歎能滅惡次兩句歎摧惡。
> The last four lines can be divided into two parts: the first two lines praise the ability to eliminate evil, and the next two lines praise the destruction of evil.
能枯十二因緣大樹能度無邊生死大海。
> It can wither the great tree of the twelve links of dependent origination, and it can cross the boundless ocean of birth and death.
於初二句又二上句即歎枯十二因緣大樹者十二因緣枝條森聳喻之大樹今枯此樹使華葉不生能度無邊生死大海者即此生死海中勇浪可畏今得度此永免驚懼無復可畏。
> Regarding the first two lines, there are two further points. The first line praises the withering of the great tree of the Twelve Links of Dependent Origination: The Twelve Links are like a tall tree with dense, spreading branches. Now this tree has withered, so its flowers and leaves no longer grow. \*The one who can cross the boundless ocean of birth and death\*: In this ocean of birth and death, the towering waves are terrifying, but now one has crossed it, forever free from fear and alarm, with nothing left to dread.
能與魔王波旬共戰能摧波旬所立勝幢。
> They can do battle with Mara Papiyas and shatter the victory banner he has raised.
能與魔王共戰者此明其始能摧波旬所立勝幢者此明其終舉終攝始外國亦戰得勝豎幢麾不勝者即倒此麾今魔戰敗即摧其幢。
> One who can do battle with the Demon King—this reveals the beginning of their practice. One who can topple the victorious banner that the Demon King has raised—this reveals the end, the final result. By describing the result, we encompass the beginning. In foreign lands, when they win a battle, they raise a banner and a pennant; those who lose have their banner toppled. Now that the demon has been defeated in battle, his banner is struck down.
次就答中次第答三雙六問初答前舉三病二問次答舉初功德兩問後答此中兩問。
> Now, let's answer the questions in the correct order, following the three pairs and six questions. First, I will address the earlier two questions about the three ailments. Next, I will answer the two questions about the initial merits. Finally, I will address the remaining two questions in this section.
善男子如我上說三種病人值遇良醫瞻病好藥及以不遇病悉得差是義云何若得不得謂定壽命所以者何是人已於無量世中修三種善謂上中下以修如是三種善故得定壽命如單越人壽命千秊有遇病者若得良醫好藥瞻病及以不得悉皆得差何以故得定命故善男子如我所說若有病人得遇良醫好藥瞻病病得除差若不遇者則不得差是義云何善男子如是之人壽命不定命雖不盡有九因緣能夭其壽何等為九一者知食不安而反食之二者多食三者宿食未消而復更食四者大小便利不隨時節五者病時不隨醫教六者不隨瞻病教敕七者強耐不吐八者夜行以夜行故惡鬼打之九者房室過差以是緣故我說病者若遇醫藥病則可差若不遇者則不可愈善男子如我上說若遇不遇俱不差者是義云何有人命盡若遇不遇悉不可差何以故以命盡故以是義故我說病人若遇醫藥及以不遇悉不得差眾生亦爾發菩提心者若遇善友諸佛菩薩咨受深法若不遇之皆悉當成何以故以其能發菩提心故如單越人得定壽命如我所說從須陀洹至辟支佛若聞善友諸佛菩薩所說深法則發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心若不值遇諸佛菩薩聞說深法則不能發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提如不定命以九因緣命則中夭如彼病人值遇醫藥病則得差若不遇者病則不差是故我說遇佛菩薩聞說深法則能發心若不值遇則不能發如我上說若遇善友諸佛菩薩聞說深法若不值遇俱不能發是義云何善男子一闡提輩若遇善友諸佛菩薩聞說深法及以不遇俱不得離一闡提心何以故斷善法故一闡提輩亦得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提所以者何若能發於菩提之心則不復名一闡提也善男子以何因緣故說一闡提得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提一闡提輩實不得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提如命盡者雖遇良醫好藥瞻病不能得差何以故以命盡故。
> Good man, as I said before, there are three types of sick people: those who encounter a good doctor, good medicine, and good care; those who do not; and both types get better. What does this mean? Whether they get better or not is determined by their fixed lifespan. Why? Because these people have cultivated three kinds of goodness—superior, middling, and inferior—over countless lifetimes. By cultivating these three kinds of goodness, they attain a fixed lifespan, like the people of Uttarakuru who live for a thousand years. Whether they fall ill and encounter a good doctor, good medicine, and good care, or not, they all recover. Why? Because of their fixed lifespan. Good man, as I also said, if a sick person encounters a good doctor, good medicine, and good care, their illness will be cured. If they do not, it will not. What does this mean? Such a person has an unfixed lifespan. Even if their life is not yet exhausted, there are nine causes that can shorten it. What are the nine? First, eating food they know is unsafe. Second, overeating. Third, eating again before previous food is digested. Fourth, not urinating or defecating at the proper time. Fifth, not following the doctor’s advice when sick. Sixth, not following the caregiver’s instructions. Seventh, stubbornly enduring nausea without vomiting. Eighth, traveling at night, and being struck by evil spirits for doing so. Ninth, excessive sexual activity. For these reasons, I say that if this sick person encounters medical treatment, their illness can be cured; if they do not, it cannot. Good man, as I also said, what about those who neither recover with treatment nor without? This refers to someone whose life is exhausted. In such a case, regardless of whether they encounter treatment or not, they cannot recover. Why? Because their life force is spent. Therefore, I say that for that patient, encountering medicine or not makes no difference—they still cannot recover. It is the same for sentient beings. Those who have awakened the Bodhi mind—whether they encounter good companions, Buddhas, or Bodhisattvas and receive profound teachings, or not—will all eventually achieve enlightenment. Why? Because they have developed the Bodhi mind. This is like the people of Uttarakuru with a fixed lifespan. As I said, beings from the stage of Stream-Enterer up to the Pratyekabuddha—if they hear profound teachings from good companions, Buddhas, or Bodhisattvas—will awaken the supreme, perfect enlightenment (Anuttara Samyaksambodhi). If they do not encounter Buddhas or Bodhisattvas and hear such teachings, they cannot develop it. This is like those with an unfixed lifespan, where the nine causes can cut their life short. Like the previous sick person who encounters medicine and recovers, or the one who does not and dies, I say that encountering Buddhas or Bodhisattvas and hearing profound teachings enables the awakening of the Bodhi mind; without such encounter, it cannot arise. Now, what about my earlier statement that whether encountering good companions, Buddhas, or Bodhisattvas and hearing profound teachings, or not, awakening still cannot occur? Good man, those who are icchantikas (unbelievers with cut-off roots of goodness) cannot abandon their icchantika mindset, whether they encounter good companions, Buddhas, or Bodhisattvas and hear profound teachings, or not. Why? Because their roots of goodness are severed. However, even icchantikas can ultimately attain Anuttara Samyaksambodhi. Why? Because if they can awaken the Bodhi mind, they shall no longer be called icchantikas. Good man, for what reason, then, is it said that icchantikas attain Anuttara Samyaksambodhi? In reality, icchantikas do not attain it—just like a person whose life is exhausted, who cannot recover even when encountering a fine doctor, good medicine, and excellent care. Why? Because their life force has come to an end.
但答前兩問不次第答直解三種病人竟即是答第一兩問了依理只應解於初後二種病人而今復解中間者不用此為答只為中間舉來今還次第為釋彼不舉來今亦不解。
> But the response did not follow the proper order in answering the first two questions. Instead, it directly explained the three types of patients, which itself answered the first and second questions. According to principle, one should only have to explain the first and last types of patients, yet the explanation of the middle type was given again. This is not used as an answer; it is simply because the middle type was brought up. Now, following the proper order, we explain it. If that (middle type) had not been brought up, we would not explain it now.
一闡名信下二答第三難。
> The first chapter is titled “Faith.” The next two chapters answer the third difficulty.
善男子一闡名信提名不具信不具故名一闡提佛性非信眾生非具以不具故云何可斷一闡名善方便提名不具修善方便不具足故名一闡提佛性非是修善方便眾生非具以不具故云何可斷一闡名進提名不具進不具故名一闡提佛性非進眾生非具以不具故云何可斷一闡名念提名不具念不具故名一闡提佛性非念眾生非具以不具故云何可斷一闡名定提名不具定不具故名一闡提佛性非定眾生非具以不具故云何可斷一闡名慧提名不具慧不具故名一闡提佛性非慧眾生非具以不具故云何可斷一闡名無常善提名不具以無常善不具足故名一闡提佛性是常非善非不善何以故善法要從方便而得而是佛性非方便得是故非善何故復名非不善耶能得善果故善果即是阿耨多羅三藐三菩提又善法者生已得故而是佛性非生已得是故非善以斷生得諸善法故名一闡提。
> Good man, "icchantika" means lacking faith. Those who lack faith are called icchantikas. Buddha-nature is not faith, and beings lack faith. Since they lack it, how can it be cut off? "Icchantika" means lacking skillful means. Those who lack the practice of skillful means are called icchantikas. Buddha-nature is not the practice of skillful means, and beings lack it. Since they lack it, how can it be cut off? "Icchantika" means lacking diligence. Those who lack diligence are called icchantikas. Buddha-nature is not diligence, and beings lack it. Since they lack it, how can it be cut off? "Icchantika" means lacking mindfulness. Those who lack mindfulness are called icchantikas. Buddha-nature is not mindfulness, and beings lack it. Since they lack it, how can it be cut off? "Icchantika" means lacking concentration. Those who lack concentration are called icchantikas. Buddha-nature is not concentration, and beings lack it. Since they lack it, how can it be cut off? "Icchantika" means lacking wisdom. Those who lack wisdom are called icchantikas. Buddha-nature is not wisdom, and beings lack it. Since they lack it, how can it be cut off? "Icchantika" means lacking impermanent goodness. Those who lack impermanent goodness are called icchantikas. Buddha-nature is eternal, neither good nor not-good. Why? Good dharmas are attained through skillful means, but Buddha-nature is not attained through skillful means; therefore it is not good. Why is it also called not not-good? Because it can bring good results—the result being supreme perfect enlightenment. Moreover, good dharmas are attained after being produced, but Buddha-nature is not attained after being produced; therefore it is not good. Those who cut off good dharmas that arise conventionally are called icchantikas.
前言若不斷佛性亦應不斷善根只善根即是佛性佛性即是善根今答佛性中道不同善根何者一闡名信提名不具佛性非信亦復非具云何可斷佛性非善非惡闡提但能斷善云何斷性其中諸句例爾古來云闡提具含眾惡不知的翻唯河西翻為極欲言極惡欲之邊此乃於總惡之內取一事為翻例如涅槃名含眾德亦無的翻而翻為滅度者亦是總中取此一事為翻又善法者名生已得依數人義善有二種一生得善二方便善世間慈孝名生得善闡提亦無故言已斷。
> The introductory passage states: "If Buddha-nature cannot be cut off, then good roots should also be uncuttable. For good roots are precisely Buddha-nature, and Buddha-nature is precisely good roots." Now we respond: Buddha-nature is the Middle Way, which differs from good roots. Why is this? The term \*icchantika\* means "one who lacks faith" or "one who lacks qualities" — such a person does not possess Buddha-nature, being neither faithful nor endowed with qualities. How, then, could \*icchantikas\* cut off Buddha-nature? Buddha-nature is neither good nor evil. \*Icchantikas\* can only cut off good, not their nature. The remaining phrases in the passage follow this pattern. In ancient times, it was said that \*icchantikas\* encompass all evils, but this is not an accurate translation. Only the Hexi region translated it as "extreme desire" — meaning the extreme of evil desire. This merely selects one aspect from the totality of evils as a translation. For example, \*nirvana\* contains many virtues and has no single precise translation; the rendition "extinction and crossing over" is likewise an instance of selecting one aspect from the whole. Furthermore, "good dharmas" refers to what is born after attainment. According to the Sarvastivada school, there are two kinds of good: (1) good acquired by birth, and (2) good acquired through skilful means. Worldly filial piety and kindness are examples of birth-acquired good — even \*icchantikas\* lack these, hence it is said they have already cut off good.
如汝所言下答第四難。
> Now, to answer your fourth question, just as you have asked.
善男子如汝所言若一闡提有佛性者云何不遮地獄之罪善男子一闡提中無有佛性。
> Good man, you ask: if an icchantika has Buddha-nature, why does it not prevent them from falling into hell? Good man, within an icchantika, there is no Buddha-nature.
前難云何不遮墮今牒問作答明闡提佛性非有非無即事求而叵得故非有而有是理故非無又善巧方便則非無無巧方便則非有。
> Earlier, it was asked why the icchantika is not excluded. Now, picking up that question, this answers: the Buddha-nature of the icchantika is neither existent nor non-existent. Since it cannot be attained by seeking it in specific phenomena, it is not existent. Yet, because it exists as a principle, it is not non-existent. Moreover, through skillful means it is not non-existent; without skillful means it is not existent.
故舉箜篌喻此有無先譬次合。
> Thus, the parable of the harp is used to illustrate these concepts of existence and non-existence: first through the story, then through its application.
善男子譬如有王聞箜篌音其聲清妙心即耽著喜樂愛念情無捨離即告大臣如是妙音從何處出大臣答王如是妙音從箜篌出王復語言持是聲來爾時大臣即持箜篌置於王前而作是言大王當知此即是聲王語箜篌出聲出聲而是箜篌聲亦不出爾時大王即斷其絃聲亦不出取其皮木悉皆析裂推求其聲了不能得爾時大王即瞋大臣云何乃作如是妄語大臣白王夫取聲者法不如是應以眾緣善巧方便聲乃出耳。
> Good man, suppose there was a king who heard the sound of a harp. Its melody was pure and exquisite, and his mind immediately became attached to it. He loved it, delighted in it, and thought of it with fondness, unable to let it go. He then said to his minister, “Where does this wonderful sound come from?” The minister replied, “Your Majesty, this wonderful sound comes from the harp.” The king said, “Then bring me that sound.” At that time, the minister brought the harp and placed it before the king, saying, “Great king, you should know that this is the sound.” The king said, “If the harp makes the sound, then let it make the sound. But the harp does not make the sound.” Then the king cut the strings, but no sound came out. He took apart the wood and leather, breaking it all into pieces, searching for the sound—but he could not find it at all. The king then became angry with the minister and said, “How can you speak such false words?” The minister replied, “Your Majesty, the way to obtain sound is not like this. It is only through the skillful combination of many causes and conditions that a sound emerges.”
初譬中所言王者譬眾生篌篌譬眾生身音聲譬佛性大臣譬佛菩薩能善說之斷絃譬就此身盡命終皮木析裂譬五根四大求之叵得即無方便故非有也。
> In the first analogy, the "king" represents sentient beings. The "harp" represents the physical body of sentient beings. The "sound" represents Buddha Nature. The "minister" represents Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, who can skillfully teach this. The "broken strings" represent the end of one's life in this body. The "split wood and torn hide" represent the five senses and four elements. Even when searched for, they cannot be found. This means that, without skillful means, they are ultimately non-existent.
眾生佛性亦復如是無有住處以善方便故得可見以可見故得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提一闡提輩不見佛性云何能遮三惡道罪善男子若一闡提信有佛性當知是人不至三趣是亦不名一闡提也以不自信有佛性故即墮三趣墮三趣故名一闡提。
> The Buddha-nature of all beings is the same in this way—it has no fixed location. Yet, through skillful means, it can be seen. Because it can be seen, one can attain Supreme Perfect Enlightenment. Those of the icchantika class do not see this Buddha-nature, so how could they possibly block the karma that leads to the three lower realms? Good man, if an icchantika comes to believe that they possess Buddha-nature, know that such a person will not fall into the three lower realms, and they should no longer be called an icchantika. It is because they do not have confidence in their own Buddha-nature that they fall into the three lower realms. And because they fall into those realms, they are called icchantikas.
合譬者佛性無有住處即非有以善方便故可得見即是非無。
> "To use an analogy: the Buddha-nature has no fixed abode, so it is not considered 'existing.' Yet, through skillful means, it can be realized—thus it is also not 'non-existing.'"
如汝所說若乳無酪下第三答第五第六兩難明應有定性。
> As you have pointed out, if milk itself does not inherently contain curds, then the third answer addresses the fifth and sixth objections, clarifying that there must be a fixed nature in the process.
善男子如汝所說若乳無酪性不應出酪尼拘陀子無五丈性則不應有五丈之質愚癡之人作如是說智者終不發如是言何以故以無性故善男子如其乳中有酪性者不應復假眾緣力也善男子如水乳雜臥至一月終不成酪若以一渧頗求樹汁投之於中即便成酪若本有酪何故待緣眾生佛性亦復如是假眾緣故則便可見假眾緣故得成阿耨多羅三藐三菩提若待眾緣然後成者即是無性以無性故能得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提善男子以是義故菩薩摩訶薩常讚人善不訟彼缺名質直心。
> Good man, as you have said: If milk inherently contained the substance of cheese, then it would produce cheese without needing any conditions. If the seed of the nyagrodha tree already possessed the nature of a fifty-foot tree, then it would grow into one without needing any conditions. Foolish people make such claims, but a wise person never speaks this way. Why? Because there is no inherent, fixed nature. Good man, if milk already contained cheese as an intrinsic property, then cheese would not depend on additional causes and conditions. Consider this: If you mix milk and water and leave it for a month, it will not turn into cheese. But if you add a single drop of the juice from the "putika" tree, it immediately becomes cheese. If cheese were already present in the milk, why would it require such conditions to arise? The same principle applies to the Buddha-nature within all beings. It becomes manifest only through the combination of various causes and conditions. It is through these conditions that one realizes supreme, perfect enlightenment (Anuttara-samyak-sambodhi). Since it depends on conditions for its realization, the Buddha-nature itself has no fixed, independent essence—and precisely because it has no fixed essence, it is possible to attain supreme, perfect enlightenment. Good man, for this reason, a great bodhisattva always praises the good qualities of others and does not dwell on their faults. This is what is called having a truthful and upright mind.
答意非定有性因緣故有若乳定有酪即應自生不假頗求樹汁既其假緣當知因中無果然前作六難今但舉一呵者何也答與奪適時皆為利益正言此難是計性性義與外道同寄正呵邪云是癡人實不呵德王此答即兼答第五歎善即足何須說十二部經今明既無定性因緣而有是故須說十二為緣。
> The meaning is not fixed in inherent nature; it exists only due to causes and conditions. If milk inherently possessed curds, then curds should arise from milk on their own, without needing to rely on the addition of plant sap. But since the sap is a necessary condition, we know that the cause (milk) does not already contain the effect (curds) within it. Earlier, six objections were raised, but now only one is addressed and refuted. Why? Because the Teacher responds according to the right moment, always for the listener's benefit. To be precise, this objection is based on the view of inherent nature—a view shared with non-Buddhist schools. By pointing out the error in this view, the Teacher is rejecting the wrong understanding, not the person (Noble Virtue King) who raised it. This response also implicitly answers the fifth objection. If simply praising "Good!" were enough, then why would the twelve types of scripture need to be taught? The point is: Since there is no fixed, inherent nature, all things arise only through causes and conditions. Therefore, the twelve types of scripture must be taught for the sake of this conditioning.
次以懺悔明直心者若有失不悔則非直心犯諐發露乃名直心文為三初設有過下正懺悔。
> Now, regarding the connection between repentance and an upright mind: if one makes mistakes but does not repent, that mind is not upright. Only by openly confessing one's faults can it be called an upright mind. The text is divided into three parts: beginning with the section "When one has faults," which details the act of repentance.
復次善男子云何菩薩質直心耶菩薩摩訶薩常不犯惡設有過失即時懺悔。
> Furthermore, good man, what is a bodhisattva’s straightforward heart? A great bodhisattva never commits wrongdoing, and if they do make a mistake, they confess it immediately.
次於師同學下即是發露。
> \[This section is about the student's relationship with their teacher. It means to openly acknowledge and confess one's faults and mistakes.\]
於師同學終不覆藏。
> Toward one's teacher and fellow students, one shall never conceal anything.
三慚愧自責下即斷相續心。
> The three feelings of shame and self-reproach immediately cut off the continuity of the mind.
慚愧自責不敢復作於輕罪中生極重想若人詰問答言實犯復問是罪為好不好答言不好復問是罪為善不善答言不善復問是罪是善果耶不善果乎答言是罪實非善果又問是罪誰之所造將非諸佛法僧所作答言非佛法僧我所作也乃是煩惱之所構集以直心故信有佛性信佛性故則不得名一闡提也以直心故名佛弟子若受眾生衣服飲食臥具醫藥種各十萬不足為多。
> With a sense of shame and self-reproach, they dare not repeat the offense, regarding even a minor transgression as exceedingly grave. If questioned, they honestly confess their fault. When asked, "Is this wrongdoing good or bad?" they reply, "It is not good." When asked, "Is this deed wholesome or unwholesome?" they reply, "It is unwholesome." When asked, "Does this act lead to a wholesome or unwholesome result?" they reply, "It truly does not lead to a wholesome result." When asked, "Who committed this offense? Was it not the Buddha, the Dharma, or the Sangha?" they reply, "It was not the Buddha, the Dharma, or the Sangha—it was I who committed it, arising from the afflictions of the mind." Because of their honest and upright mind, they have faith in their Buddha-nature. One who has faith in their Buddha-nature is no longer called an \*icchantika\* \[a being devoid of spiritual potential\]. Because of this honest mind, they are called a true disciple of the Buddha. Even if such a person receives clothing, food, shelter, and medicine—up to one hundred thousand offerings of each kind—it is not considered excessive.
結如文。
> As described in the text.
是名菩薩質直心也。
> This is what is known as the upright and sincere mind of a Bodhisattva.
云何修戒下第三釋戒文為二一離惡戒。
> How should one cultivate moral discipline? This is the third section explaining the precepts, and it is divided into two parts: first, abandoning harmful precepts.
云何菩薩修治於戒菩薩摩訶薩受持禁戒不為生天不為恐怖乃至不受狗戒雞戒牛戒雉戒不作破戒不作缺戒不作瑕戒不作雜戒不作聲聞戒。
> How does a bodhisattva cultivate and refine their precepts? A great bodhisattva upholds the ethical precepts—not for the sake of being reborn in heaven, nor out of fear, and they certainly do not adopt the precepts of dogs, chickens, cows, or pheasants. They do not create broken precepts, incomplete precepts, flawed precepts, mixed precepts, or precepts aimed at personal liberation like a disciple of the Hearer path.
即牛狗等竝取其相而為護持外道得通者見牛狗等死後生天便學彼行望得生天餘皆例爾。
> As for those who imitate cows, dogs, and other animals, adopting their appearance and behavior for spiritual practice: Outsiders who attain psychic powers observe that cows, dogs, and such creatures are reborn in heaven after death. So they copy their actions, hoping to be reborn in heaven themselves. All similar cases follow this pattern.
次得善戒如文。
> Next, attain wholesome precepts as taught.
受持菩薩摩訶薩戒尸羅波羅蜜戒得具足戒不生憍慢是名菩薩修大涅槃具第三戒。
> By upholding the bodhisattva-mahasattva precepts and the discipline of the Śīla Pāramitā, one attains complete morality without arising pride. This is called a bodhisattva cultivating the Great Nirvāṇa, fulfilling the third precept.
云何菩薩親近下第四釋善友為四一明是二辨非三證非四證是初明是為二一菩薩是。
> How does a bodhisattva draw near to and rely upon spiritual friends? This is explained in four parts: first, clarifying what is correct; second, distinguishing what is not correct; third, confirming what is not correct; fourth, confirming what is correct. The first part, clarifying what is correct, is divided into two sections: the first explains that a bodhisattva is the correct type of spiritual friend.
云何菩薩親近善友菩薩摩訶薩常為眾生歎說善道不說惡道說於惡道非善果報。
> How does a Bodhisattva cultivate virtuous friendship? A great Bodhisattva always speaks to living beings about the path of goodness, never about the path of evil. They explain that the path of evil does not lead to beneficial results.
二如來是。
> The two are Tathagatas.
善男子我身即是一切眾生真善知識是故能斷富伽羅婆羅門所有邪見善男子若有眾生親近我者雖有應生地獄因緣即得生天如須那剎多等應墮地獄以見我故即得斷除地獄因緣生於色天。
> Good people, I am the true and good teacher (kalyāṇa-mitra) for all beings, and that is why I can cut through all the wrong views held by the Brahmin Puggalaka. Good people, if any beings draw close to me, even if they have done things that would normally force them to be reborn in hell, they will instead be reborn in heaven. For example, there was Sunakṣatra and others like him who should have fallen into hell, but because they met me, they were able to sever the causes for hellish rebirth and were born instead in the heavens of form.
剎多見佛得生天者二解數義必得上定乃得生天今見佛力發昔修定故得生天二云但令伏下界惡隨有散善皆得生天。
> "Some see the Buddha and are reborn in heaven. There are two explanations for this: First, one must attain the higher states of meditative absorption (dhyāna) to be reborn in heaven. However, by seeing the Buddha, the power of that encounter reawakens their past practice of meditation, enabling rebirth in heaven. Second, it is said that if one merely subdues the lower realms of evil and possesses even scattered goodness, they too can be reborn in heaven."
雖有舍利下第二明非。
> Even if there are relics, the second section clarifies what is not the case.
雖有舍利弗目楗連等不名眾生真善知識何以故生一闡提心因緣故。
> Even though there are people like Shariputra and Maudgalyayana, they cannot be called true spiritual guides for all beings. Why? Because they have given rise to minds of \*icchantika\* (those who have lost all desire for Enlightenment).
既未識機不能稱緣是故云非如來稱緣知病識藥是故名是。
> Since they cannot recognize potential and cannot accord with conditions, it is said they are not like the Tathāgata. The Tathāgata, however, recognizes the conditions, knows the illness, and knows the remedy—therefore, it is called "suchness."
我昔住於下第三證非。
> Long ago, I dwelt in a state below the third stage of realization.
善男子我昔住於波羅柰國時舍利弗教二弟子一觀白骨一令數息經歷多秊皆不得定以是因緣即生邪見言無涅槃無漏之法若其有者我應得之何以故我能善持所受戒故我於爾時見是比丘生此邪心喚舍利弗而訶責之汝不善教云何乃為是二弟子顛倒說法汝二弟子其性各異一主澣衣一是金師金師之子應教數息澣衣之人應教骨觀以汝錯教令是二人生於惡邪我於爾時為是二人如應說法二人聞已得阿羅漢果是故我為一切眾生真善知識非舍利弗目楗連等。
> Good men, in the past, when I was staying in the city of Varanasi, Shariputra was teaching two disciples. One was instructed to practice meditation on the impurity of the body by visualizing bones, and the other was taught to practice counting the breath. Many years passed, and neither attained meditative concentration. Because of this, they fell into wrong views, thinking, "There is no Nirvana or teaching that eliminates defilements. If such things existed, we should have attained them. Why? Because we are fully capable of upholding the precepts we have received." At that time, I saw that these monks had developed such mistaken thoughts. I called Shariputra and reprimanded him, saying, "You have not taught them properly. How could you have given such misguided instruction to these two disciples, turning the teaching upside down? These two disciples have fundamentally different natures. One is a clothes-washer, and the other is a goldsmith. The goldsmith's son should have been taught to count his breath, and the clothes-washer should have been taught to meditate on bones. Because of your mistaken teachings, these two men have fallen into wrong and evil views." Then, for those two men, I taught them the Dharma according to their true natures. Upon hearing this, both of them attained Arhatship. Therefore, I am the true spiritual guide for all beings—not even Shariputra or Maudgalyayana can compare.
觀白骨者即背捨禪數息即根本禪舊云金師子善取火色故應教數息今明不爾金師之子善解調槌宜扶其習故教數息私云準莊嚴論云善解鞴囊善知息相浣衣之人善取淨相故教骨觀今明不爾浣人厭穢作背捨易。
> One who meditates on the white bones is practicing the "liberation through detachment" meditation. Counting the breath belongs to the foundational methods of meditation. It was previously said: "The goldsmith’s son is skilled at capturing the color and glow of fire, so he should be taught breath-counting." But now I say this is not so. The goldsmith’s son has good skill in handling his hammering tool, so it is fitting to support his natural tendency and therefore teach him breath-counting. \*Commentary:\* According to the \*Ornament of the Mahayana Sutras\*: "One who is skilled at working a bellows understands the nature of the breath; one who washes clothes is good at grasping the quality of purity, so he should be taught the skeleton meditation." But now I say this is not so. The clothes-washer, wearied by impurity, finds it easier to turn toward "detachment" (the liberation meditation).
若使眾生下第四證是如文。
> If they cause sentient beings to attain the fourth realization, it is as the text states.
若使眾生有極重結得遇我者我以方便即為斷之如我弟難陀有極重欲我以種種善巧方便而為除之鴦掘魔羅有重瞋恚以見我故瞋恚即斷阿闍世王有重愚癡以見我故癡心即滅如婆熈伽長者於無量劫積集成就極重煩惱以見我故即便斷滅設有弊惡斯下之人親近於我作弟子者以是因緣一切人天恭敬愛念尸利毱多邪見熾盛因見我故邪見即滅因見我故斷地獄因作生天緣如氣噓旃陀羅命垂終時因見我故還得壽命如憍尸迦狂心錯亂因見我故還得本心如瘦瞿曇彌屠家之子常作惡業以見我故即便捨離如闡提比丘因見我故寧捨身命不毀禁戒如草繫比丘以是義故阿難比丘說半梵行名善知識我言不爾具足梵行乃名善知識是名菩薩修大涅槃具足第四親善知識。
> If sentient beings with heavy karmic obstructions encounter me, I will skillfully sever those obstructions for them through skillful means. For example, my younger brother Nanda had extremely strong desires, which I eliminated through various skillful and expedient methods. Angulimala had great hatred, but upon seeing me his hatred immediately ceased. King Ajatashatru had deep ignorance; upon seeing me, his ignorant mind dissipated. Similarly, the elder Pashvika had accumulated severe afflictions over countless eons, yet upon seeing me they were completely destroyed. Even vile and evil people who come to be my disciples, due to this cause, become honored and cherished by all beings, humans, and gods. Shrigupta's wrong views were intense, yet upon seeing me his wrong views vanished. Upon seeing me, he severed the cause for hell and created the condition for rebirth in heaven—just like the dying man who regained his life upon seeing me. The mad Kapila, with his deranged mind, recovered his senses upon seeing me. The thin Gautami, son of a butcher, always engaged in evil deeds but abandoned them upon seeing me. The icchantika monk, upon seeing me, would rather sacrifice his body than break the precepts, like the monk bound by grass. For this reason, the Venerable Ananda said that half of the holy life is having a good spiritual friend. I tell you: it is not so. The entire holy life consists of having a good spiritual friend. This is what is meant by a bodhisattva cultivating the Great Nirvana, perfecting the fourth \[aspect\]: relying on a good spiritual friend.
云何具足多聞下釋第五章文為五。
> Question: What constitutes complete and extensive learning? This clarifies the text of Chapter Five, which is divided into five sections.
云何菩薩摩訶薩具足多聞菩薩為大涅槃十二部經書寫讀誦分別解說是名菩薩具足多聞。
> How does a great bodhisattva perfect the quality of being widely learned? For the sake of great nirvana, they write, recite, and explain the twelve divisions of the scriptures. This is what it means for a bodhisattva to be perfectly widely learned.
除十一部經唯毗佛略受持讀誦書寫解說亦名菩薩具足多聞。
> Of the eleven types of scriptures, if a person only receives, upholds, recites, writes, and explains the Vaipulya (Expanded) Sutras, this is still called a bodhisattva possessing abundant learning.
除十二部經若能受持是大涅槃微妙經典書寫讀誦分別解說是名菩薩具足多聞除是經典具足全體若能受持一四句偈。
> Those who can uphold, copy, recite, and explain the most profound Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra—setting aside the twelve divisions of scriptures—truly embody the quality of "extensive learning." Yet even apart from fully mastering this whole scripture, simply upholding and reciting a single four-line verse from it is enough.
復除是偈若能受持如來常住性無變易是名菩薩具足多聞。
> Moreover, if one can receive and uphold this verse—realizing that the Tathagata's nature is eternal and unchanging—then one is truly a bodhisattva with abundant learning.
復除是事若知如來常不說法亦名菩薩具足多聞何以故法無性故如來雖說一切諸法常無所說是名菩薩修大涅槃成就第五具足多聞。
> Furthermore, if one understands that the Tathāgata essentially never teaches any doctrine, this is also called a Bodhisattva possessing abundant learning. Why? Because the true nature of all phenomena is without intrinsic essence. Although the Tathāgata explains all teachings, in ultimate reality, nothing has been taught. This is what is meant by a Bodhisattva cultivating the Great Nirvāṇa and perfecting the fifth quality of abundant learning.
前一就文言後四就義理十二文多而義奢佛略文少而義要義要故是多聞又除十二唯此涅槃者不言涅槃之理出十二外正言十二文言浩博除廣就略其理存焉即是多聞何必在言故復除全體但取四偈又除四偈但取常住復除常住取寂默故知損之又損之遂至於無為但貴其理以為多聞不取博言而為多聞。
> In the beginning, there were twelve sections of text; later, these were distilled into four principles based on meaning. The twelve sections were wordy and their meaning vast. The Buddha's teaching was concise, yet essential—because the core meaning is what truly matters, and that is what makes one truly learned. Furthermore, of the twelve, only the teaching on Nirvana is essential. This is not to say that the truth of Nirvana lies outside the twelve; rather, it means that within these extensive twelve, we set aside the broader scope and focus on what remains—the essential principle. And that alone constitutes true learning. Why must it rely on words? Thus, we first set aside the entirety, taking only the four verses. Then, from those four verses, we take only what is eternal and abiding. Then, from that, we take only what is silence itself. Therefore we see: loss upon loss, until we arrive at effortless action. What is valued is the principle itself as true learning; it is not the abundance of words that makes one learned.
次善男子若有下第三稱歎又二一法說歎二譬說歎法說為二一唱三章門二解釋。
> "Next, good man, there is the third section, 'Praise,' which is divided into two parts: first, praise through dharma discourse; second, praise through simile. The dharma discourse section is further divided into two: first, presenting three general themes; second, explaining them in detail."
善男子若有善男子善女人為大涅槃具足成就如是五事難作能作難忍能忍難施能施。
> Good man, if there are good men and good women who, for the sake of the Great Nirvana, fully and completely cultivate these five practices—they are able to do what is difficult to do, able to endure what is difficult to endure, and able to give what is difficult to give.
解釋為兩一釋三事二不存著如文。
> Explanation: the two principles of "One" and "Three" are explained. In terms of specific matters, do not cling to them, just as the text states.
云何菩薩難作能作若聞有人食一胡麻得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提者信是語故乃至無量阿僧祇劫常食一麻若聞入火得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提者於無量劫在阿鼻獄入熾火聚是名菩薩難作能作云何菩薩難忍能忍若聞受苦手杖刀石斫打因緣得大涅槃即於無量阿僧祇劫身具受之不以為苦是名菩薩難忍能忍云何菩薩難施能施若聞能以國城妻子頭目髓腦慧施於人得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提者即於無量阿僧祇劫以其所有國城妻子頭目髓腦慧施於人是名菩薩難施能施。
> What makes a bodhisattva able to do what is difficult? If they hear that just eating one sesame seed can lead to supreme perfect enlightenment, they trust this teaching and for countless eons eat only one sesame seed per day. If they hear that entering fire can lead to supreme perfect enlightenment, they remain for countless eons in the Avīci Hell, amidst blazing flames. This is what is called a bodhisattva being able to do what is difficult. What makes a bodhisattva able to endure what is difficult? If they hear that enduring suffering—being beaten with hands, sticks, knives, or stones—can lead to great nirvāṇa, they willingly undergo such pain for countless eons without considering it suffering. This is what is called a bodhisattva being able to endure what is difficult. What makes a bodhisattva able to give what is difficult to give? If they hear that offering their kingdom, cities, spouse, children, head, eyes, marrow, or brain to others can lead to supreme perfect enlightenment, they dedicate all these things for countless eons, freely giving them away. This is what is called a bodhisattva being able to give what is difficult to give.
菩薩雖復難作能作終不念言是我所作難忍難施亦復如是。
> Even though a bodhisattva does what is difficult to do, they never think, "This is something I have accomplished." The same is true for enduring the unendurable and giving what is difficult to give.
譬為三初為難施作譬亦有合。
> The parable has three parts, beginning with the difficulty of giving—a parable that also carries a meaning.
善男子譬如父母唯有一子愛之甚重以好衣裳上妙甘膳隨時將養令無所乏設令其子於父母所起輕慢心惡口罵辱父母愛故不生瞋恨亦不念言我與是兒衣服飲食。
> Good man, consider this: parents who have only one child love him deeply. They give him fine clothes and excellent food, caring for him at all times so that he lacks nothing. Even if that child treats them with disrespect, speaks harshly, and curses them, the parents, because of their love, do not become angry or resentful. Nor do they think, "I gave this child clothes and food."
菩薩摩訶薩亦復如是視諸眾生猶如一子。
> The great bodhisattva also regards all living beings as if they were their own child.
次為難忍難作作譬亦有法合。
> Now I will give a parable to illustrate this difficult and arduous practice, and there is a corresponding teaching to go with it.
若子遇病父母亦病為求醫藥勤加救療病既差已終不生念我為是兒療治病苦。
> If a child falls ill, the parents also become sick. They seek medicine and treatment for the child, diligently working to cure them. Once the child recovers, the parents never think, “I have treated this child’s illness and suffered for it.”
菩薩亦爾見諸眾生遇煩惱病生愛念心而為說法以聞法故諸煩惱斷煩惱斷已終不念言我為眾生斷諸煩惱若生此念終不得成阿耨多羅三藐三菩提唯作是念無一眾生我為說法令斷煩惱。
> A Bodhisattva is just the same. Seeing living beings afflicted with the sickness of disturbing emotions, a compassionate wish arises in their heart, and they teach the Dharma for their sake. By hearing this Dharma, living beings cut off their disturbing emotions. After those emotions are cut off, the Bodhisattva never thinks, "I was the one who cut off their disturbing emotions for these beings." If such a thought arises, they will never attain supreme, perfect enlightenment. Instead, they only think this: "There is not a single being for whom I have taught the Dharma, nor one whose disturbing emotions I have eliminated."
三為無著作譬有法譬合。
> Third, for the sake of the none-abiding, take up the analogy of existence; for the sake of the abiding, take up the analogy of non-existence.
菩薩摩訶薩於諸眾生不瞋不喜何以故善能修習空三昧故菩薩若修空三昧者當於誰所生瞋生喜。
> A Great Bodhisattva neither resents nor favors sentient beings. Why? Because they are skilled in cultivating the meditation on emptiness. If a Bodhisattva cultivates the meditation on emptiness, toward whom could they generate resentment or favor?
善男子譬如山林猛火所焚若人斫伐或為水漂而是林木當於誰所生瞋生喜。
> Good man, consider this: if a mountain forest is burned by a fierce fire, cut down by someone, or swept away by water, toward whom should those trees feel anger or joy?
菩薩摩訶薩亦復如是於諸眾生無瞋無喜何以故修空三昧故。
> The great bodhisattva-mahasattvas are the same in this regard—they feel neither anger nor attachment toward any being. Why is this? Because they have cultivated the meditative absorption of emptiness.
爾時光明下第二論義兩番問答初問又二先兩定次兩難。
> At that time, under the second round of discussion and debate, there were two series of questions and answers. In the first series, there were two parts: first, two determinations were made, followed by two refutations.
爾時光明徧照高貴德王菩薩白佛言世尊一切諸法性自空耶空空故空。
> Then the Radiant and Noble Virtue King Bodhisattva said to the Buddha, "World-Honored One, is the nature of all things inherently empty? Is emptiness itself empty because it is empty?"
先兩定者一定自空二定空空。
> The two stabilizations: First, the nature of self is empty. Second, the nature of emptiness is also empty.
若性自空者不應修空然後見空云何如來言以修空而見空耶若性自不空雖復修空不能令空。
> If phenomena are inherently empty, there would be no need to cultivate emptiness in order to see it. So why does the Tathagata say that one must cultivate emptiness in order to see it? On the other hand, if phenomena are not inherently empty, then even if one tries to cultivate emptiness, they cannot be made empty.
若性自是空此結初定為一難若性自不空此結後定為一難。
> If nature were already empty, that would contradict the first assertion. If nature were not empty, that would contradict the latter assertion.
善男子下答為二先答初定者性本自空何以故一明一切法不可得故既不可得豈不是空次答後定二須修空然後見空而其本性理本是空但不能見要修於空方乃見空既答兩定二難自遣答初定中為三一略標。
> Good man, I will answer two points. First, the fundamental nature of tranquility is originally empty. Why? Because it illuminates that all phenomena are unobtainable. Since they are unobtainable, how could they not be empty? Second, you must cultivate emptiness and then see emptiness. Though its fundamental nature is originally empty, you cannot see it. Only by practicing emptiness can you then see it. Having answered these two points, both doubts naturally dissolve. Within the answer to the first point, there are three parts: first, a brief statement.
善男子一切諸法性本自空。
> Good man, the true nature of all things is originally empty.
次何以故下廣釋。
> Now, the following text provides a detailed explanation.
何以故一切諸法性不可得故善男子色性不可得云何色性色者非地水火風不離地水火風非青黃赤白不離青黃赤白非有非無云何當言色有自性以性不可得故說為空一切諸法亦復如是。
> Why is this so? Because the true nature of all phenomena cannot be grasped. Good son, the nature of form cannot be grasped. How can the nature of form be described? Form is not earth, water, fire, or wind, yet it is not separate from earth, water, fire, or wind. It is not blue, yellow, red, or white, yet it is not separate from blue, yellow, red, or white. It is neither existent nor non-existent. How, then, can we say that form has an inherent nature? Because its true nature cannot be grasped, it is described as empty. All phenomena are likewise.
三相似相續下舉得失致結於中又三初舉凡夫失。
> Three similarities and continuous transformations—below, the text raises gains and losses, concluding in the middle. This is further divided into three parts: first, it raises the losses of ordinary people.
以相似相續故凡夫見已說言諸法性不空寂。
> Because things appear to continue in a seemingly uninterrupted sequence, ordinary people, upon seeing this, claim that all phenomena are fundamentally not empty or tranquil.
次菩薩得。
> And then the bodhisattva attained.
菩薩摩訶薩具足五事是故見法性本空寂。
> A great being, a Bodhisattva, who perfects these five qualities, sees that the nature of all phenomena is fundamentally empty and serene.
更呵凡夫失。
> Watch out, ordinary people lose their way.
善男子若有沙門及婆羅門見一切法性不空者當知是人非是沙門非婆羅門不得修習般若波羅蜜不得入於大般涅槃不得現見諸佛菩薩是魔眷屬。
> Good man, if there are monks or Brahmins who see all phenomena as having an intrinsic nature that is not empty, know that such a person is neither a true monk nor a true Brahmin. They cannot cultivate the Perfection of Wisdom, cannot enter into Great Nirvana, cannot behold the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas directly—they are followers of Mara.
善男子一切諸法下答第二定意明雖復本空復須修習然後乃見有無常性故滅能滅之有空性故修空得空當知本空具有法譬合。
> Good man, all dharmas have the following answer: The second fixed intention clarifies that although all things are originally empty, one must still practice and cultivate before this emptiness can be seen. Therefore, there exists a nature of impermanence that can be ended, and a nature of emptiness that makes cultivation possible. Through cultivating emptiness, one attains emptiness. Know that the original emptiness contains both the principle and the analogy to illustrate this point.
善男子一切諸法性本自空亦因菩薩修習空故見諸法空。
> Good person, the true nature of all phenomena is originally empty. And it is through the Bodhisattva’s practice of emptiness that one comes to see all phenomena as empty.
譬有二初如一切下舉內法為譬。
> This is like two archers learning their craft from the very beginning.
善男子如一切法性無常故滅能滅之若非無常滅不能滅有為之法有生相故生能生之有滅相故滅能滅之一切諸法有苦相故苦能令苦。
> Good man, all dharmas are impermanent by nature, so they can be ended by cessation. If they were not impermanent, cessation could not end them. Conditioned phenomena have the characteristic of arising, so they can be brought forth by birth. They have the characteristic of ceasing, so they can be ended by cessation. All dharmas have the characteristic of suffering, so suffering can cause them to be experienced as pain.
如鹽下舉外法為譬。
> Let me use salt as an example to illustrate external phenomena.
善男子如鹽性鹹能鹹異物石蜜性甘能甘異物苦酒性酢能酢異物薑木性辛能辛異物訶棃勒苦能苦異物菴羅果淡能淡異物毒性能害令異物害甘露之性令人不死若合異物亦能不死。
> Good man, just as salt has a salty nature that can make other things salty, rock candy has a sweet nature that can make other things sweet, sour wine has a sour nature that can make other things sour, ginger and pepper have a spicy nature that can make other things spicy, myrobalan has a bitter nature that can make other things bitter, mango has a bland nature that can make other things bland, and poison has a harmful nature that can harm other things, the nature of ambrosia is to make people immortal—if it is combined with other things, it can also make them immortal.
菩薩修空下合也。
> A bodhisattva cultivates emptiness by uniting with sentient beings below.
菩薩修空亦復如是以修空故見一切法性皆空寂。
> A bodhisattva cultivates emptiness in the same way—by cultivating emptiness, they see that the nature of all phenomena is inherently empty and tranquil.
光明下第二番論義還從鹽譬生問為二一問觀空是倒。
> In the light, a second discussion arises from the analogy of salt. The inquiry is twofold: first, it questions whether perceiving emptiness is itself an inverted view.
光明徧照高貴德王菩薩復作是言世尊若鹽能令非鹹作鹹修空三昧若如是者當知是定非善非妙其性顛倒。
> The Noble King of Bodhisattvas, Pervading Radiance, further asked, "World-Honored One, if salt can make what is not salty become salty, then when cultivating the Samadhi of Emptiness, if this is the case, it should be known that this meditative absorption is neither good nor excellent—its nature is inverted."
何者本來不空而修空見空是於不空見空寧非顛倒例如實常而見無常無常見常皆是顛倒亦有譬合還轉鹽譬來此為譬。
> What is fundamentally real and unchanging is not empty. To practice the view of emptiness on that which is not empty is mistaken—isn't that an inversion? For instance, seeing the truly permanent as impermanent, or seeing the impermanent as permanent, are both inversions. There is also a metaphor to illustrate this: the turning of salt, which serves as an analogy.
二問空既是無為何所見。
> Second question: If Emptiness is simply "nothingness," then what is there to see?
若空三昧唯見空者空是無法為何所見。
> If the meditation on emptiness only sees emptiness, then emptiness is nothing at all—so what is it that is seen?
若有可見即非是空若無可見不應言見。
> If something can be seen, it is not empty. If nothing can be seen, it should not be called "seeing."
佛答兩問為二章答初為三一總標二廣釋三重結初總標中有法譬合。
> The Buddha answered the two questions in two chapters. His answer to the first question has three parts: first, a general summary; second, a detailed explanation; and third, a concluding summary. In the general summary, there are explanations through principles, metaphors, and their combination.
善男子是空三昧見不空法能令空寂然非顛倒如鹽非鹹作鹹是空三昧亦復如是不空作空。
> Good man, this "Samādhi of Emptiness" sees the non-empty nature yet makes it empty and tranquil, yet this is not an inversion. Just as salt is not saltiness itself but creates saltiness, so too does the Samādhi of Emptiness: it makes the non-empty appear empty.
佛答竟云見不空法能令其空而非顛倒但就理論無非空者而於眾生乃是不空只滅其謂情故云能令不空作空是故非倒。
> The Buddha replied: "Seeing a non-empty dharma and being able to make it empty—this is not an inversion. In terms of ultimate truth, nothing is not empty. But for sentient beings, there is that which is not empty. One merely removes their mistaken attachments; therefore, it is said that one can make the non-empty appear as empty. Thus, this is not an inversion."
善男子貪是有性下第二廣釋又二先廣釋非空作空後廣釋非是顛倒初文云非空者於緣是有又二一明貪欲於其是有次明色性於其是有。
> Good man, desire does exist. The next section provides a detailed explanation in two parts: First, it expands on what is not empty as being empty; second, it expands on what is not delusion. The first section says: "That which is not empty exists within conditions." This is further divided into two: one, to clarify that desire exists within its conditions; two, to clarify that the nature of form exists within its conditions.
善男子貪是有性非是空性貪若是空眾生不應以是因緣墮於地獄若墮地獄云何貪性當是空耶。
> Good man, greed has a real nature; it is not empty by nature. If greed were empty, sentient beings would not fall into hell because of it. Since they do fall into hell, how could the nature of greed be empty?
善男子色性是有何等是性所謂顛倒以顛倒故眾生生貪若是色性非顛倒者云何能令眾生生貪以生貪故當知色性非不是有。
> Good son, suppose form had a fixed nature of its own. What would that nature be? It would be delusion. Because of delusion, sentient beings become attached to form. If the nature of form were not delusion, how could it cause beings to give rise to attachment? Because it does cause attachment, you should know that the nature of form is not completely non-existent.
若不是有云何貪著今言非空使空者是法皆空以是義故下第二廣釋非倒又二初標非倒。
> If something did not exist, how could one be attached to it? Now we say that \[the concept of\] "emptiness" is itself not empty—this means all dharmas are empty. Therefore, the second section below explains in detail that \[this view\] is not mistaken. It is divided into two parts: first, it states that it is not mistaken.
以是義故修空三昧非顛倒也。
> Therefore, cultivating the meditation on emptiness is not a delusion.
一切凡夫下正是廣釋又二一不生貪相故非倒。
> All ordinary people—this is a further explanation. First, not giving rise to attachment is why it is not delusion.
善男子一切凡夫若見女人即生女相菩薩不爾雖見女人不生女相以不生相貪則不生貪不生故非顛倒也以世間人見有女故菩薩隨說言有女人若見男時說言是女則是顛倒是故我為闍提說言汝婆羅門若以晝為夜是即顛倒以夜為晝是亦顛倒晝為晝相夜為夜相云何顛倒。
> Good man, when ordinary people see a woman, they immediately fix upon the concept of "woman." A bodhisattva does not do this. Although they see a woman, they do not conjure up the concept of "woman." Because they don't create this concept, desire does not arise. Since desire does not arise, it is not a delusion. Worldly people, seeing a woman, decide there is "woman," so bodhisattvas sometimes speak of "woman" for the sake of convention. But if, when seeing a man, one calls him a woman, that would be a delusion. This is why I said to Jati, "Brahmin, if you call daytime 'night,' that is a delusion. If you call night 'daytime,' that too is a delusion. But to call daytime 'daytime' and night 'night'—how could that be a delusion?"
次見佛性故非倒。
> Because one directly sees the Buddha nature, it is not a delusion.
善男子一切菩薩住九地者見法有性以是見故不見佛性若見佛性則不復見一切法性以修如是空三昧故不見法性以不見故則見佛性。
> Good man, bodhisattvas who abide at the ninth stage see that phenomena have a fixed nature. Because of this view, they do not see the Buddha-nature. If they were to see the Buddha-nature, they would no longer see phenomena as having a fixed nature. By cultivating the emptiness-samadhi in this way, they cease to see phenomena as having a fixed nature. By not seeing this, they then come to see the Buddha-nature.
問入初地時已能見空此文云住九地者見法有性其義云何解云約二忍明義初地至十地是無生忍唯佛地是寂滅忍今約二忍九地望佛寂滅則見法有性雖比於佛非究竟空亦分有空故華嚴云七地菩薩能入寂滅寂滅即空赴緣異說不應迷執。
> Question: When first entering the first stage (Ground of Joy), one can already see emptiness. But this text says those dwelling in the ninth stage see phenomena as having inherent nature. What is the meaning of this? Explanation: This is explained in terms of the two kinds of patience (forbearance). The range from the first ground to the tenth ground is the patience of non-arising (anupattika-dharma-ksanti), while only the Buddha-ground is the patience of tranquil cessation (nirodha-samapatti). Now, from the perspective of these two kinds of patience, when comparing the ninth stage to the Buddha's tranquil cessation, the ninth-stage practitioner sees phenomena as having inherent nature. Although compared to the Buddha this is not ultimate emptiness, they still have a partial experience of emptiness. Therefore, the Avatamsaka Sutra says: "A seventh-stage bodhisattva can enter tranquil cessation." Tranquil cessation is emptiness itself. Different explanations arise according to conditions, so one should not become attached or confused.
諸佛菩薩下第三重結。
> A third-level summary follows the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas.
諸佛菩薩有二種說一者有性二者無性為眾生故說有法性為諸賢聖說無法性為不空者見法空故修空三昧令得見空無法性者亦修空故空以是義故修空見空。
> All Buddhas and Bodhisattvas teach in two ways. The first speaks of existence, the second of non-existence. For the sake of sentient beings, they teach that things have a true nature. For the sake of noble sages, they teach that there is no fixed nature. For those who cling to existence, who do not see emptiness, they teach the meditation on emptiness so that they may awaken to emptiness. For those who already understand that there is no fixed nature, they also teach this meditation on emptiness, so that they may further realize it. For this reason, they teach the practice of meditation to awaken to emptiness.
佛亦有時說有說無當知為緣故今皆說以為空也。
> The Buddha sometimes speaks of existence and sometimes of non-existence. You should understand that these teachings are given for a specific purpose; ultimately, all of them are explained as emptiness.
善男子汝言見空下第二答後難又二先牒問。
> Good man, you asked about seeing emptiness. Next, I will respond to your question.
善男子汝言見空空是無法為何所見者。
> Good man, you say that when one sees emptiness, emptiness itself is devoid of any existence. So then, what is it that you see?
善男子下正答正答又二初正答次引昔證。
> Good man, the main answer is given below. This answer has two parts: first the main answer, then a citing of a past verification.
善男子如是如是菩薩摩訶薩實無所見無所見者即無所有無所有者即一切法菩薩摩訶薩修大涅槃於一切法悉無所見若有見者不見佛性不能修習般若波羅蜜不得入於大般涅槃是故菩薩見一切法性無所有善男子菩薩不但因見三昧而見空也般若波羅蜜亦空禪波羅蜜亦空毗黎耶波羅蜜亦空羼提波羅蜜亦空尸波羅蜜亦空檀波羅蜜亦空色亦空眼亦空識亦空如來亦空大般涅槃亦空是故菩薩見一切法皆悉是空。
初文者以無見為見例如般若無知無所不知。
是故我下廣引昔證如文。
是故我在迦毗羅城告阿難言汝莫愁惱悲號啼哭。
阿難即言如來世尊我今親屬悉皆殄滅云何當得不悲泣耶如來與我俱生此城俱同釋種親戚眷屬云何如來獨不愁惱光顏更顯善男子我復告言阿難汝見迦毗真實是有我見空寂悉無所有汝見釋種悉是親戚我修空故悉無所見以是因緣汝生愁苦我身容顏益更光顯諸佛菩薩修習如是空三昧故不生愁惱。
是名菩薩修大涅槃微妙經典成就具足第九功德。
次明第十功德亦先標次釋。
復次善男子云何菩薩修大涅槃微妙經典具足最後第十功德。
釋中舊用三十七品為體興皇云涅槃佛性為體舊以菩薩行因道品是因故以前文為體興皇云前諸功德未以涅槃為體最後義深故最後文為體問此中何不用六度而用道品一解云但是略耳一解云釋論云六度是遠因道品是近因今明不爾道品攝度捨覺攝檀餘皆可見婆沙文中以十一法攝於道品十一與六名體相當但餘二念通於諸度就文為二初明功德次論義初又二先明道品入涅槃。
善男子菩薩修習三十七品入大涅槃常樂我淨為諸眾生分別解說大涅槃顯示佛性。
次簡得失。
若須陀洹斯陀含阿那含阿羅漢辟支佛菩薩信是語者悉得入於大般涅槃若不信者輪回生死。
信者為得不信者失初功德云不聞聞者常住祕藏即是中道不聞聞者外道經書毗伽羅論即俗諦不聞聞十一部經即真諦三諦一心中不聞而聞今第十功德亦如是三十七品即真諦入大涅槃即中道為諸眾生分別演說即俗諦此亦一心三諦始終不異若能信者入大涅槃意謂此解方近於理云云興皇以最後功德涅槃為體第九已上皆不如此此解大失已如前難。
論義為二一問二答。
爾時光明徧照高貴德王菩薩白佛言世尊何等眾生於是經中不生恭敬。
答為二先舉惡人為誡次舉善人為勸惡人為三先法說。
善男子我涅槃後有聲聞弟子愚癡破戒喜生鬬諍捨十二部經讀誦種種外道典籍文頌手筆受畜一切不淨之物言是佛聽。
次舉五譬。
如是之人以好栴檀賈易凡木以金易鍮石銀易白鑞絹易氀毼以甘露味易於惡毒。
三還合五譬先別合後總合。
云何栴檀賈易凡木如我弟子為供養故向諸白衣演說經法白衣情逸不喜聽聞白衣處高比丘在下兼以種種肴膳飲食而供給之猶不肎聽是名栴檀賈易凡木云何以金賈易鍮石鍮石譬色聲香味觸金以譬戒我諸弟子以色因緣破所受戒是名以金貿易鍮石云何以銀易於白鑞銀譬十善鑞譬十惡我諸弟子放捨十善行十惡法是名以銀賈易白鑞云何以絹貿易氀毼氀毼以譬無慚無愧絹譬慚愧我諸弟子放捨慚愧習無慚愧是名以絹賈易氀毼云何甘露賈易毒藥毒藥以譬種種供養甘露以譬諸無漏法我諸弟子為利養故向諸白衣苦自譽讚言得無漏是名甘露賈易毒藥。
初譬栴檀貿凡木者二車竝載一炭一檀值冬炭售檀者遂乃燒香為炭雖得易售而無所直持戒者貧寒饑渴見破戒者富煗飲噉即毀戒甘嗜飲食所利無幾所失者大次譬中云金易鍮石者昔人乘馬腰著金帶見乘驢者著驢𦃓帶即便問之市中何物貴彼即答云驢𦃓甚貴其即易之人為色聲而棄正法其猶如是餘三譬如文。
別合如文。
以如是等惡比丘故是大涅槃微妙經典廣行流布於閻浮提當是之時有諸弟子受持讀誦書寫是經演說流布當為如是諸惡比丘之所殺害時惡比丘相與聚會共立嚴制若有受持大涅槃經書寫讀誦分別說者一切不得共住共坐談論語言何以故涅槃經者非佛所說邪見所造邪見之人即是六師六師所說非佛經典所以者何一切諸佛悉說諸法無常無我無樂無淨若言諸法常樂我淨云何當是佛所說經諸佛菩薩聽諸比丘畜種種物六師所說不聽弟子畜一切物如是之義云何當是佛之所說諸佛菩薩不制弟子斷牛五味及以食肉六師不聽食五種鹽五種牛味及以脂血若斷是者云何當是佛之正典諸佛菩薩演說三乘而是經中純說一乘謂大涅槃如此之言云何當是佛之正典諸佛畢竟入於涅槃是經言佛常樂我淨不入涅槃是經不在十二部數即是魔說非是佛說善男子如是之人雖我弟子不能信順是涅槃經。
善男子當爾之時下二舉善人。
善男子當爾之時若有眾生信此經典乃至半句當知是人真我弟子因如是信即見佛性入於涅槃。
次光明下領解者。
爾時光明徧照高貴德王菩薩白佛言世尊善哉善哉如來今日善能開示大涅槃經世尊我因是事即得悟解大涅槃經一句半句以解一句至半句故少見佛性如佛所說我亦當得入大涅槃。
是品中第二領解段如文。
三是名下總結。
是名菩薩修大涅槃微妙經典具足成就第十功德。
大般涅槃經卷第二十四
大般涅槃經疏卷第十
日東 天台沙門本純 分會
## 南本大般涅槃經會疏卷第二十四