T38n1768_涅槃經游意

大正藏第 38 冊 No. 1768 涅槃經游意

No. 1768 [cf. No. 375]

涅槃經游意

沙門吉藏撰

就此經有南北二本，廣略不同，北方舊本，卷或有三十三，或三十者，品唯有十三。南土文，卷有三十六，有二十五品。

其間文義浩博，豈可詳寫。故經云：「一恒二恒始彷彿見之，三恒四恒乃能知一分之義」。梁武皇帝云：「涅槃者，義高萬善，事絕百非，空空不能測其真際，玄玄不能究其妙門。自非德均平等，心會無生，金壚玉室豈易入哉！」

余昔經注錄之疏零失，今之憶者，十不存一，因茲講以聊復疏之。

就攝山大師唯講《三論》及《摩訶般若》，不開《涅槃》、《法華》，諸學士請講《涅槃經》，大師云：「諸人今解《般若》，那復令再講。」復重請，乃為道「本有今無偈」而遂不講文。至興皇以來始大弘斯典。

但開此經，初形勢非一，或明開路義，如國家域有梗礙，偏隅未賓，開疆祐出，先須斫伐，然後方得行師。今亦爾，為從來舊執擁塞正道故，須破洗然，后乃得講經。開路義，別有科目，待餘暇矣。又或明舍那、釋迦二佛教門差別不同，或辨因果人法十雙相對，並置而不論。

今於此經初且為六

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 大正藏第 38 冊 No. 1768 涅槃經游意

No. 1768 [cf. No. 375]

涅槃經游意

沙門吉藏撰

關於這部經有南北兩個版本，內容詳略不同。北方舊版本，卷數有三十三卷或者三十卷的，品數只有十三品。南方版本，卷數有三十六卷，有二十五品。

其中的文字和義理浩瀚深廣，怎麼可能詳細寫盡。所以經中說：『一恒河沙、二恒河沙的時間才彷彿見到它，三恒河沙、四恒河沙的時間才能瞭解它一分的義理』。梁武皇帝說：『涅槃的意義，高尚超過萬種善行，事理超越一切錯誤。用空性的智慧也無法測度它的真實邊界，用玄妙的智慧也無法窮盡它的奧妙法門。如果不是德行達到平等，心領會無生，又怎麼能輕易進入這金色的殿堂和玉砌的房間呢！』

我過去所作的經註疏已經零散遺失，現在能回憶起來的，十分之一都不到，因此藉著這次講解來稍微重新疏解它。

攝山大師只講《三論》和《摩訶般若經》，不講《涅槃經》、《法華經》。學士們請求講《涅槃經》，大師說：『你們現在理解了《般若經》，為什麼還要再講呢？』 再次懇請，於是大師就說了『本有今無偈』，最終還是沒有講解經文。直到興皇法朗以來，才開始大力弘揚這部經典。

但是開啟這部經，最初的形式不止一種，或者闡明開路的意義，比如國家疆域有阻礙，偏遠地區沒有歸順，要開疆拓土，首先必須進行征伐，然後才能行軍。現在也是這樣，因為向來舊有的執著堵塞了正道，所以必須破除洗滌，然後才能講解經文。開路的意義，另有科目，等待以後有空閑再說吧。又或者闡明舍那佛（盧舍那佛，報身佛）和釋迦佛（應化身佛）兩種佛教法門的差別不同，或者辨別因果、人法十雙相對，這些都放在一邊暫且不論。

現在對於這部經，首先分為六

English version Tàishō Tripiṭaka Volume 38, No. 1768, Annotations on the Nirvana Sutra

No. 1768 [cf. No. 375]

Annotations on the Nirvana Sutra

Composed by the Shramana Jizang

Regarding this Sutra, there are two versions, Northern and Southern, differing in length and detail. The old Northern version has either thirty-three or thirty fascicles, with only thirteen chapters. The Southern version has thirty-six fascicles, with twenty-five chapters.

The text and meaning within are vast and profound; how could they be written in detail? Therefore, the Sutra says: 'Only after one Ganges of sand, two Ganges of sand of time, does one vaguely see it; after three Ganges of sand, four Ganges of sand of time, does one understand one part of its meaning.' Emperor Wu of Liang said: 'The meaning of Nirvana surpasses myriad virtues, and its principles transcend all errors. Emptiness cannot fathom its true boundary, and mystery cannot exhaust its wondrous gate. If one's virtue does not reach equality and one's mind does not comprehend non-origination, how can one easily enter the golden hall and jade chamber!'

My past commentaries on the Sutra have been scattered and lost; of what I can now recall, less than one-tenth remains. Therefore, I will take this lecture as an opportunity to re-annotate it.

The Master of Sheshan only lectured on the Three Treatises and the Mahaprajna Sutra, not on the Nirvana Sutra or the Lotus Sutra. The scholars requested a lecture on the Nirvana Sutra, and the Master said: 'You now understand the Prajna Sutra, why should I lecture on it again?' After repeated requests, the Master then spoke the 'Originally Existent, Now Non-Existent Gatha', and ultimately did not lecture on the text. It was not until Xinghuang Falang that this scripture began to be greatly promoted.

However, in opening this Sutra, the initial approaches are not uniform. One might clarify the meaning of 'opening the path'. For example, if there are obstacles in a country's territory, and remote areas have not submitted, to expand the territory, one must first engage in conquest before deploying troops. It is the same now; because old attachments have blocked the right path, they must be broken and cleansed before the Sutra can be lectured. The meaning of 'opening the path' has a separate subject, which will be discussed when I have leisure. Or, one might clarify the differences between the teachings of Vairocana Buddha (the Sambhogakaya Buddha) and Shakyamuni Buddha (the Nirmanakaya Buddha), or distinguish between cause and effect, and the ten pairs of relative human and Dharma aspects, but these will be set aside for now.

Now, regarding this Sutra, I will first divide it into six

【English Translation】 Tàishō Tripiṭaka Volume 38, No. 1768, Annotations on the Nirvana Sutra No. 1768 [cf. No. 375] Annotations on the Nirvana Sutra Composed by the Shramana Jizang Regarding this Sutra, there are two versions, Northern and Southern, differing in length and detail. The old Northern version has either thirty-three or thirty fascicles, with only thirteen chapters. The Southern version has thirty-six fascicles, with twenty-five chapters. The text and meaning within are vast and profound; how could they be written in detail? Therefore, the Sutra says: 'Only after one 'heng he sha' (恒河沙, as many as the sands of the Ganges river), two 'heng he sha' of time, does one vaguely see it; after three 'heng he sha', four 'heng he sha' of time, does one understand one part of its meaning.' Emperor Wu of Liang said: 'The meaning of Nirvana surpasses myriad virtues, and its principles transcend all errors. Emptiness cannot fathom its true boundary, and mystery cannot exhaust its wondrous gate. If one's virtue does not reach equality and one's mind does not comprehend non-origination, how can one easily enter the golden hall and jade chamber!' My past commentaries on the Sutra have been scattered and lost; of what I can now recall, less than one-tenth remains. Therefore, I will take this lecture as an opportunity to re-annotate it. The Master of Sheshan only lectured on the Three Treatises and the Mahaprajna Sutra, not on the Nirvana Sutra or the Lotus Sutra. The scholars requested a lecture on the Nirvana Sutra, and the Master said: 'You now understand the Prajna Sutra, why should I lecture on it again?' After repeated requests, the Master then spoke the 'Originally Existent, Now Non-Existent Gatha', and ultimately did not lecture on the text. It was not until Xinghuang Falang that this scripture began to be greatly promoted. However, in opening this Sutra, the initial approaches are not uniform. One might clarify the meaning of 'opening the path'. For example, if there are obstacles in a country's territory, and remote areas have not submitted, to expand the territory, one must first engage in conquest before deploying troops. It is the same now; because old attachments have blocked the right path, they must be broken and cleansed before the Sutra can be lectured. The meaning of 'opening the path' has a separate subject, which will be discussed when I have leisure. Or, one might clarify the differences between the teachings of 'She Na Fo' (舍那佛, Vairocana Buddha) and 'Shi Jia Fo' (釋迦佛, Sakyamuni Buddha), or distinguish between cause and effect, and the ten pairs of relative human and Dharma aspects, but these will be set aside for now. Now, regarding this Sutra, I will first divide it into six

---

段：一大意、二宗旨、三釋名、四辨體、五明用、六料簡。

第一說經大意者：

此經之意復何窮？如：河西五門、波藪七分、興皇八章，迦葉三十解問，如來次第解釋則三十解意。今直舉其樞要，陳其綱領，可然。

正道平等，本自清凈，豈有生死異於涅槃？特由眾生虛妄，執文求實，聞名仍不見其真，或云涅槃是有，或意是無，或言二諦所攝，或意出二諦之外，或意出生死無常，或意涅槃常住，因此謬造種種異計，便成繫縛，致有生死。

前諸佛菩薩為引此妄情假說涅槃，為出處方便空假立名。名無得物，物無應名。名物既爾，萬法安立。所以生死涅槃本無二相，但為化此虛妄，如度虛空，實無眾生得滅度者，如此了悟名得涅槃，實無涅槃可得。

但約此迷悟說凡說聖，假名生死強稱涅槃，令改凡成聖，捨生死得涅槃。既悟此本來不二、亦復不一，若於凡聖、生死、涅槃作一異解者，則障正道，名為「據語」。今破此一異等見，名為「開道」。

約智開復，有何道可開耶？從來云如來之身非凡是聖，是聖涅槃之法，是常非無常。今為對此故，明如來之身非凡非聖，凡聖悉是如來善巧，涅槃非常無常，常無常皆涅槃方便。

何者病耶？常病重故，設無常之藥。眾生執有

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 段落分為六個部分：一、大意；二、宗旨；三、釋名；四、辨體；五、明用；六、料簡。 第一部分，說明經文的大意： 這部經的意義何其深遠？例如：河西五門、波藪七分、興皇八章，迦葉（Kasyapa，佛陀的弟子）有三十種不同的提問，如來（Tathagata，佛陀的稱號）依次解釋，就有三十種不同的意義。現在只舉出其中的關鍵，陳述其綱領，這樣就可以了。 正道是平等無二的，其本性是清凈的，怎麼會有生死不同於涅槃（Nirvana，解脫）呢？只是由於眾生的虛妄，執著于文字而追求實際，聽聞其名卻仍然不見其真。或者說涅槃是『有』，或者認為是『無』，或者說是二諦（Two Truths，勝義諦和世俗諦）所包含的，或者認為超出二諦之外，或者認為出生死是無常的，或者認為涅槃是常住的。因此錯誤地製造種種不同的見解，便形成了束縛，導致了生死。 之前的諸佛菩薩爲了引導這種虛妄的情感，假說涅槃，爲了方便引導眾生出離而虛假地設立名稱。名稱本身無法得到實物，實物本身也不需要名稱來對應。名稱和實物既然如此，萬法才能安立。所以生死和涅槃本來就沒有兩種不同的相狀，只是爲了教化這種虛妄，就像度化虛空一樣，實際上沒有眾生能夠得到滅度。如此了悟，就叫做得到涅槃，實際上沒有涅槃可以得到。 只是根據這種迷惑和覺悟來說凡夫說聖人，假名叫做生死，勉強稱之為涅槃，使凡夫改變成為聖人，捨棄生死而得到涅槃。如果領悟到這本來不是二、也不是一，如果對於凡夫、聖人、生死、涅槃作一或異的理解，那麼就會障礙正道，這叫做『據語』。現在破除這種一異等見，叫做『開道』。 根據智慧來開啟和恢復，有什麼道可以開啟呢？向來說如來（Tathagata，佛陀的稱號）之身不是凡夫而是聖人，是聖人涅槃（Nirvana，解脫）之法，是常而不是無常。現在爲了針對這種說法，說明如來之身不是凡夫也不是聖人，凡夫和聖人都是如來的善巧方便，涅槃不是常也不是無常，常和無常都是涅槃的方便。 什麼是病呢？執著于『常』的病很嚴重，所以設定『無常』的藥。眾生執著于『有』。

【English Translation】 English version: Section: 1. Main Idea, 2. Purpose, 3. Explanation of Terms, 4. Distinguishing the Essence, 5. Clarifying the Function, 6. Analysis. First, explaining the main idea of the Sutra: How profound is the meaning of this Sutra? For example: the Five Gates of Hexi, the Seven Divisions of Posu, the Eight Chapters of Xinghuang, Kasyapa (Kasyapa, Buddha's disciple) has thirty different questions, and the Tathagata (Tathagata, title of the Buddha) explains them in order, resulting in thirty different meanings. Now, we will directly point out the key points and state the outline, which should be sufficient. The right path is equal and without duality, and its nature is pure. How can there be birth and death different from Nirvana (Nirvana, liberation)? It is only due to the delusions of sentient beings, clinging to the words and seeking reality, hearing the name but still not seeing its truth. Some say Nirvana is 'existent,' others think it is 'non-existent,' some say it is encompassed by the Two Truths (Two Truths, ultimate truth and conventional truth), others think it is beyond the Two Truths, some think birth and death are impermanent, others think Nirvana is permanent. Therefore, they mistakenly create various different views, which become bondage, leading to birth and death. The previous Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, in order to guide this deluded emotion, provisionally spoke of Nirvana, and falsely established names as a convenient means to lead sentient beings out of suffering. The name itself cannot obtain the object, and the object itself does not need a name to correspond to it. Since names and objects are like this, all dharmas can be established. Therefore, birth and death and Nirvana originally have no two different aspects, but only to transform this delusion, just like liberating empty space, in reality, no sentient being can attain liberation. To realize this is called attaining Nirvana, but in reality, there is no Nirvana to be attained. It is only based on this delusion and enlightenment that we speak of ordinary beings and sages, falsely calling it birth and death, and forcibly calling it Nirvana, so that ordinary beings can change into sages, abandon birth and death and attain Nirvana. If one realizes that this is originally neither two nor one, if one understands ordinary beings, sages, birth and death, and Nirvana as one or different, then one will obstruct the right path, which is called 'clinging to words.' Now, breaking this view of oneness and difference is called 'opening the path'. According to wisdom to open and restore, what path can be opened? It has always been said that the body of the Tathagata (Tathagata, title of the Buddha) is not an ordinary being but a sage, and that the Dharma of the sage's Nirvana (Nirvana, liberation) is permanent and not impermanent. Now, in response to this statement, it is explained that the body of the Tathagata is neither an ordinary being nor a sage, and that ordinary beings and sages are all skillful means of the Tathagata, and that Nirvana is neither permanent nor impermanent, and that permanence and impermanence are both expedient means of Nirvana. What is the disease? The disease of clinging to 'permanence' is serious, so the medicine of 'impermanence' is prescribed. Sentient beings cling to 'existence'.

---

為涅槃故設無，身心皆盡乃為妙極，物情不了便謂佛身無涅槃斷滅。故經云：其復不久，王復得病，須服乳藥。故今教為對無常故設常住，則左右除病，迭代破執。執病若盡，在藥皆除。

涅槃之法竟何所有？雖無所有而無所不有，雖無所不有而無所有。有無既爾，常無常亦然，非常非無常，常無常具足也。

大師於此明四雙八隻義：一凡聖，二常無常，三隱顯，四半滿。

言凡聖者，涅槃實不開凡聖，但住大涅槃能建大義，或時為凡，或時化聖。

故佛初出世間同凡夫事，雖同凡而異解。凡初生則行諸方七步，云：「天上天下，唯我為尊」。又云：「我生胎分盡，是最末後身，既自得解脫，復度眾生。」此言已障是聖，但說此言已，更為嬰兒；乃至槃馬、捔力等，具同凡事，此則以凡覆聖。今日教起明久已，聖人方便便現為此事，則是以聖開凡。

開覆之義，具通今昔。昔開凡覆聖，今開聖覆凡。但昔覆名，今開稱。所以爾者，初為緣未堪，不得說是聖，但得說是凡，則凡覆聖。今始得說道：我本是聖人，以聖開凡。故前覆，今道開也。

人聞此開覆，便作二解。聞昔覆，謂言別有一聖為凡所覆；聞今開，則謂卻除于凡別有聖出。今明不爾，昔本來是聖，為緣未堪不得說為聖

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：爲了涅槃的緣故，假設『無』的存在，身心都達到止息才是最微妙的境界。但是世俗之人不瞭解，就認為佛身進入涅槃就是斷滅。所以經書上說：『過不了多久，國王又生病了，需要服用乳藥。』因此，現在的教法是爲了應對無常，假設常住的存在，這樣就能左右逢源地去除病根，不斷破除執念。如果執念的病根消除了，那麼藥也就沒有用處了。

涅槃的法究竟有什麼呢？雖然看似什麼都沒有，但實際上無所不有；雖然看似無所不有，但實際上什麼都沒有。有和無是這樣，常和無常也是這樣，既不是常也不是無常，而是常與無常同時具備。

大師在這裡闡明四雙八隻的含義：一是凡夫與聖人，二是常與無常，三是隱與顯，四是半與滿。

說到凡夫與聖人，涅槃實際上並不區分凡夫與聖人，只是安住于大涅槃境界，能夠建立偉大的意義，有時示現為凡夫，有時教化為聖人。

所以佛陀最初出現在世間時，做的事情和凡夫一樣，雖然和凡夫一樣，但是理解卻不同。凡夫初生時會向四方各走七步，說：『天上天下，唯我為尊。』又說：『我生胎分已盡，這是最後一次投胎，我已經自我解脫，還要度化眾生。』這些話已經表明他是聖人，但是說了這些話之後，又表現得像個嬰兒；甚至像槃馬（Panama，人名）、捔力（比力氣）等，完全和凡夫一樣，這就是用凡夫的表象來掩蓋聖人的本質。現在開始宣講教義，說明很久以前就是聖人了，聖人爲了方便，就示現出這些凡夫的事情，這就是用聖人的本質來開啟凡夫的智慧。

開啟和掩蓋的含義，貫通過去和現在。過去是開啟凡夫的智慧，掩蓋聖人的本質；現在是開啟聖人的本質，掩蓋凡夫的智慧。只是過去是掩蓋真相，現在是揭示真相。之所以這樣，是因為當初機緣還不成熟，不能說他是聖人，只能說他是凡夫，所以是凡夫掩蓋聖人的本質。現在才可以說：我本來就是聖人，用聖人的本質來開啟凡夫的智慧。所以之前是掩蓋，現在是揭示。

人們聽到這種開啟和掩蓋的說法，就產生兩種理解。聽到過去掩蓋真相，就認為另外有一個聖人被凡夫所掩蓋；聽到現在揭示真相，就認為去除凡夫的表象，另外有一個聖人出現。現在說明不是這樣，過去本來就是聖人，因為機緣還不成熟，不能說他是聖人。

【English Translation】 English version: For the sake of Nirvana, 'non-being' is posited. The ultimate state of wonder is when both body and mind are extinguished. However, worldly beings do not understand this and mistakenly believe that the Buddha's body entering Nirvana is annihilation. Therefore, the sutra says: 'Before long, the king fell ill again and needed to take milk medicine.' Thus, the present teaching establishes permanence in response to impermanence, thereby effectively removing the root of the illness and continuously breaking down attachments. If the illness of attachment is eradicated, then the medicine becomes unnecessary.

What exactly exists in the Dharma of Nirvana? Although it seems that nothing exists, in reality, everything exists. Although it seems that everything exists, in reality, nothing exists. Just as with being and non-being, so too with permanence and impermanence—it is neither permanent nor impermanent, but rather a state that encompasses both permanence and impermanence.

The master here elucidates the meaning of the four pairs and eight singles: first, ordinary beings and sages; second, permanence and impermanence; third, hidden and manifest; and fourth, partial and complete.

Regarding ordinary beings and sages, Nirvana does not actually differentiate between them. However, one who abides in great Nirvana can establish great meaning, sometimes appearing as an ordinary being, sometimes transforming into a sage.

Therefore, when the Buddha first appeared in the world, he acted like an ordinary person, though his understanding was different. An ordinary person, upon being born, takes seven steps in each direction, saying: 'Above heaven and below heaven, I alone am the honored one.' He also says: 'My cycle of rebirth is complete; this is my last body. Having attained liberation myself, I will also liberate sentient beings.' These words already indicate that he is a sage, but after saying them, he behaves like an infant; even engaging in activities like Panama (Panama, a name) and wrestling (testing strength), completely like an ordinary person. This is using the appearance of an ordinary person to conceal the essence of a sage. Now, the teaching begins to explain that he has long been a sage. For the sake of convenience, the sage manifests these ordinary affairs, which is using the essence of a sage to awaken the wisdom of ordinary beings.

The meaning of revealing and concealing pervades the past and present. In the past, it was revealing the wisdom of ordinary beings and concealing the essence of a sage; now, it is revealing the essence of a sage and concealing the wisdom of ordinary beings. The difference is that in the past, it was concealing the truth, while now, it is revealing the truth. The reason for this is that in the beginning, the conditions were not ripe, so it could not be said that he was a sage, only that he was an ordinary person, thus the ordinary person concealed the essence of a sage. Now, it can be said: I was originally a sage, using the essence of a sage to awaken the wisdom of ordinary beings. Therefore, before it was concealing, now it is revealing.

Upon hearing this talk of revealing and concealing, people develop two interpretations. Hearing about the past concealment, they think that there is another sage being concealed by an ordinary person. Hearing about the present revelation, they think that by removing the appearance of an ordinary person, another sage appears. Now, it is explained that this is not the case. In the past, he was originally a sage, but because the conditions were not ripe, it could not be said that he was a sage.

---

，唯得說為凡，隱聖道不得說名之為覆，豈別有一聖可覆？今只道：昔凡則是聖，詺之為開，豈別有凡可除，聖可開耶？

故經云：「顯發如來方便密教故，昔隱不說為密也，今日顯說為開密也」。

凡聖既然，常無常亦爾。昔說「無常」隱「常」為「覆」，今日顯說于「常」為「開」。然昔說「無常」，只說「常」為「無常」，詺「無常」覆「常」；今日只說向「無常」者，「常」名為「開」也。又，且昔日名「覆」，今複名「開」，何者？昔說「無常」不為「無常」，昔說「無常」為開。今日「常」若無昔「無常」，何能顯今日「常」？是則昔「無常」為今「常」。化方便故，昔「無常」今得是「開」也。此是片到明，未是好開。

至下文明常、無常，為顯非常、非無常，常無常、無常常具足，乃是「開密」也。如此凡聖常無常開無常常，常無常、無常常，具足乃是「開密」也。如此凡聖常、無常開覆，並是大涅槃方便。如用若真，明凡覆聖，聖開凡，常、無常開覆未足為奇，亦非妙用，只為畢竟無。如此凡聖常無常，而能在中為凡為聖，能常能無常開覆等事，乃是不可思議方便妙用耳。

然此可有三道開覆：一、以凡覆聖，以聖開凡。二者、凡聖是實，覆涅槃凡聖方便。今明凡聖有無

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：只能說這是凡夫，隱藏聖道不能稱之為『覆』（遮蓋），難道另外還有一種聖可以被遮蓋嗎？現在只是說：過去的凡夫就是聖人，這稱之為『開』（揭示），難道另外還有一種凡夫可以去除，聖人可以揭示嗎？

所以經中說：『爲了顯發如來的方便密教，過去隱藏不說叫做『密』（秘密），今天顯現說明叫做『開密』（揭開秘密）』。

凡夫和聖人既然如此，常和無常也是這樣。過去說『無常』，隱藏『常』叫做『覆』，今天顯現說明『常』叫做『開』。然而過去說『無常』，只是說『常』是『無常』，稱『無常』遮蓋了『常』；今天只是說向著『無常』的，『常』就叫做『開』。而且，過去叫做『覆』，現在又叫做『開』，為什麼呢？過去說『無常』不是爲了『無常』，過去說『無常』是爲了『開』。今天『常』如果沒有過去的『無常』，怎麼能顯現今天的『常』呢？所以過去的『無常』就是今天的『常』。因為教化的方便，過去的『無常』今天才能是『開』。這只是片面的明白，還不是好的『開』。

到下面的經文明白常、無常，是爲了顯現非常、非無常，常無常、無常常都具備，才是『開密』。像這樣凡聖常無常開無常常，常無常、無常常，都具備才是『開密』。像這樣凡聖常、無常開覆，都是大涅槃的方便。如果運用得真切，明白凡夫遮蓋聖人，聖人揭示凡夫，常、無常的開覆還不足為奇，也不是妙用，只是因為畢竟是空無。像這樣凡聖常無常，而能在這其中作為凡夫作為聖人，能常能無常，開覆等等事情，才是不可思議的方便妙用啊。

然而這可以有三種開覆：第一，用凡夫遮蓋聖人，用聖人揭示凡夫。第二，凡夫和聖人是實在的，遮蓋涅槃的凡聖方便。現在明白凡聖的有無。

【English Translation】 English version: It can only be said that this is a common mortal; concealing the holy path cannot be called 'covering' (fu 覆), is there another saint that can be covered? Now it is only said: the past mortal is the saint, this is called 'opening' (kai 開), is there another mortal that can be removed, and a saint that can be revealed?

Therefore, the sutra says: 'In order to reveal the Tathagata's expedient secret teaching, what was hidden and not spoken in the past is called 'secret' (mi 密), and what is revealed and explained today is called 'opening the secret' (kai mi 開密)'.

Since mortals and saints are like this, permanence and impermanence are also like this. In the past, saying 'impermanence' and concealing 'permanence' was called 'covering'; today, revealing and explaining 'permanence' is called 'opening'. However, in the past, saying 'impermanence' was only saying that 'permanence' is 'impermanence', calling 'impermanence' covering 'permanence'; today, it is only said that towards 'impermanence', 'permanence' is called 'opening'. Moreover, in the past it was called 'covering', and now it is again called 'opening', why? In the past, saying 'impermanence' was not for 'impermanence', in the past, saying 'impermanence' was for 'opening'. If today's 'permanence' did not have the past 'impermanence', how could it reveal today's 'permanence'? Therefore, the past 'impermanence' is today's 'permanence'. Because of the expedient of teaching, the past 'impermanence' can be 'opening' today. This is only a one-sided understanding, not yet a good 'opening'.

Understanding permanence and impermanence in the following text is to reveal non-permanence and non-impermanence; permanence and impermanence, and non-impermanence and non-permanence are all complete, which is 'opening the secret'. Like this, mortals and saints, permanence and impermanence, opening non-permanence and non-permanence, permanence and impermanence, non-permanence and non-permanence, all complete, is 'opening the secret'. Like this, mortals and saints, permanence and impermanence, opening and covering, are all expedients of great Nirvana. If the application is genuine, understanding that mortals cover saints, and saints reveal mortals, the opening and covering of permanence and impermanence is not remarkable, nor is it a wonderful application, it is only because it is ultimately empty. Like this, mortals and saints, permanence and impermanence, and being able to be a mortal or a saint in it, being able to be permanent or impermanent, opening and covering, etc., is an inconceivable expedient and wonderful application.

However, there can be three kinds of opening and covering: first, using mortals to cover saints, and using saints to reveal mortals. Second, mortals and saints are real, covering the expedient of Nirvana's mortals and saints. Now understanding the existence and non-existence of mortals and saints.

---

，並是涅槃妙用，名之為開。三者、凡聖覆非凡聖方便，今始得顯涅槃非聖非凡，凡聖具足名之為開。

凡聖既爾，常無常亦然也。但凡聖中復有凡始凡終，聖始聖終，凡終聖始，聖始凡終。

何者？昔托王宮而生為凡始，道場樹下成道為凡終。成佛為聖始，雙林入滅為聖終。只聖始則凡終，凡終則聖始也。

開凡終為聖始，聖始則凡終者；可得聖終為凡始，凡始則聖終不？解云：若通就實凡實聖則可例。何者？只起一有得斷常之心，無得正觀便斷，則凡始為聖終。若無得正觀不觀，有得虛妄便起，則聖終為凡始也。但此中如來一期凡聖方便只得凡終為聖始，聖始為凡終；不得聖終為凡始，凡始為聖終。

若進論，此間感息，他方現生；則此土聖終，他國凡始也。

問：凡有始終，聖亦始終者？無常有始終，常亦有始終不？常無常相對，無常有始終，常無始終；亦應凡聖相對，凡有始終，聖無始終。

解云：小乘明凡聖皆是無常，故皆有始終。大乘凡聖有二種：一者方便，則凡聖皆無常。二者實義則無，此凡聖者，無始終也。問者說無常覆常為覆，邪常之覆正常耶？若昔無常但覆邪常，不覆正常者，昔說是凡但覆邪聖，不覆今正聖。昔正覆今日聖，亦昔無常正覆今常。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 這就是涅槃的精妙作用，稱之為『開』（kai，開啟）。第三，凡夫和聖人相互覆蓋，並非凡夫覆蓋聖人，而是爲了方便，現在才得以顯現涅槃既非聖人也非凡夫，凡夫和聖人都具備，這稱之為『開』。

凡夫和聖人如此，常與無常也是如此。但凡夫和聖人中又有凡夫的開始和凡夫的結束，聖人的開始和聖人的結束，凡夫的結束和聖人的開始，聖人的開始和凡夫的結束。

什麼是凡夫的開始？過去依託王宮而生是凡夫的開始，在菩提樹下成道是凡夫的結束。成佛是聖人的開始，在雙林入滅是聖人的結束。只是聖人的開始就是凡夫的結束，凡夫的結束就是聖人的開始。

開啟凡夫的結束成為聖人的開始，聖人的開始就是凡夫的結束；可以得到聖人的結束成為凡夫的開始，凡夫的開始就是聖人的結束嗎？解釋說：如果從通達實相的角度來看，凡夫和聖人都是真實的，那麼就可以類比。為什麼呢？只要生起一絲一毫的有和得、斷和常的念頭，沒有得到正確的觀照就中斷了，那麼凡夫的開始就是聖人的結束。如果沒有得到正確的觀照，不去觀照，有了虛妄的念頭就生起，那麼聖人的結束就是凡夫的開始。但這裡如來一生的凡夫和聖人的方便，只能是凡夫的結束成為聖人的開始，聖人的開始成為凡夫的結束；不能是聖人的結束成為凡夫的開始，凡夫的開始成為聖人的結束。

如果進一步討論，此處的感知停止，在其他地方顯現出生；那麼此土的聖人結束，就是他國的凡夫開始。

問：凡夫有開始和結束，聖人也有開始和結束嗎？無常有開始和結束，常也有開始和結束嗎？常與無常相對，無常有開始和結束，常沒有開始和結束；也應該像凡夫和聖人相對，凡夫有開始和結束，聖人沒有開始和結束。

解釋說：小乘認為凡夫和聖人都是無常的，所以都有開始和結束。大乘認為凡夫和聖人有兩種：一種是方便，那麼凡夫和聖人都是無常的。另一種是實義，那麼就沒有這種凡夫和聖人，沒有開始和結束。提問者說無常覆蓋常是覆蓋，是邪常的覆蓋正常嗎？如果過去無常只是覆蓋邪常，不覆蓋正常，那麼過去說凡夫只是覆蓋邪聖，不覆蓋現在正聖。過去正確地覆蓋今天的聖人，也像過去無常正確地覆蓋今天的常。

【English Translation】 English version: This is the wonderful function of Nirvana, called 'kai' (開, opening). Thirdly, ordinary beings and sages cover each other, not that ordinary beings cover sages, but for the sake of skillful means, it is now revealed that Nirvana is neither sage nor ordinary being, both ordinary beings and sages are fully present, this is called 'kai'.

As it is with ordinary beings and sages, so it is with permanence and impermanence. But among ordinary beings and sages, there are the beginning and end of ordinary beings, the beginning and end of sages, the end of ordinary beings and the beginning of sages, the beginning of sages and the end of ordinary beings.

What is the beginning of an ordinary being? Being born in a royal palace in the past is the beginning of an ordinary being, attaining enlightenment under the Bodhi tree is the end of an ordinary being. Becoming a Buddha is the beginning of a sage, entering Nirvana in the twin Sala trees is the end of a sage. Only the beginning of a sage is the end of an ordinary being, and the end of an ordinary being is the beginning of a sage.

Opening the end of an ordinary being to become the beginning of a sage, the beginning of a sage is the end of an ordinary being; can the end of a sage be obtained to become the beginning of an ordinary being, and the beginning of an ordinary being be the end of a sage? The explanation is: if viewed from the perspective of understanding reality, both ordinary beings and sages are real, then it can be analogized. Why? As long as a single thought of having and gaining, cutting off and permanence arises, and one does not obtain correct contemplation and interrupts it, then the beginning of an ordinary being is the end of a sage. If one does not obtain correct contemplation, does not contemplate, and a false thought arises, then the end of a sage is the beginning of an ordinary being. But here, the Tathagata's (如來, Thus Come One) skillful means of ordinary beings and sages in one lifetime can only be that the end of an ordinary being becomes the beginning of a sage, and the beginning of a sage becomes the end of an ordinary being; it cannot be that the end of a sage becomes the beginning of an ordinary being, and the beginning of an ordinary being becomes the end of a sage.

If we discuss it further, the cessation of perception here, and the manifestation of birth elsewhere; then the end of a sage in this land is the beginning of an ordinary being in another country.

Question: Ordinary beings have a beginning and an end, and sages also have a beginning and an end? Impermanence has a beginning and an end, and permanence also has a beginning and an end? Permanence and impermanence are relative, impermanence has a beginning and an end, and permanence has no beginning and end; it should also be like ordinary beings and sages being relative, ordinary beings have a beginning and an end, and sages have no beginning and end.

The explanation is: the Hinayana (小乘, Lesser Vehicle) believes that ordinary beings and sages are all impermanent, so they all have a beginning and an end. The Mahayana (大乘, Great Vehicle) believes that there are two kinds of ordinary beings and sages: one is skillful means, then ordinary beings and sages are all impermanent. The other is the real meaning, then there is no such ordinary being and sage, there is no beginning and end. The questioner says that impermanence covering permanence is covering, is it the covering of wrong permanence over right permanence? If in the past impermanence only covered wrong permanence, and did not cover right permanence, then in the past saying ordinary beings only covered wrong sages, and did not cover the present right sages. The past correctly covers today's sages, just as the past impermanence correctly covers today's permanence.

---

又難：若昔無常覆今常，不覆昔常者；昔無常除今常，不除昔常，昔宜禁乳，則昔通除常。又，若無常覆今常者，未說今常，云何覆今常？前說無常時可以今常覆昔無常，昔無常未有今常，何得言昔無常覆今耶？

解此已如上諸佛本是常，昔隱不得說常，但說無常，故言無常覆常也。

然此開覆則是如來藏義。

何故名如來藏？為當衆生藏如來，名「如來藏」；為當如來自藏，名「如來藏」耶？然只此間，則是解竟，然具此二義：一者、眾生性顛倒隱覆如來性，故名「如來藏」；二者、眾生不堪聞如來之性，隱而不說，亦名「如來藏」。

今教顯一切眾生皆有佛性，佛性是「我」義。眾生依方等大教臨度斷除顛倒，則顯如來藏。藏顯則名法身。顯眾生有佛性，則顯眾生是佛性根本。眾生是佛故有佛性，非佛則不得有佛性。如人姓張，郎則有張姓，非張則不得有張姓，佛性亦爾。

故論云：非眾生身內有佛非密，身外有亦非密，四並非密。眾生則是佛為密也。

有時難此義，何故有佛性非密則是佛為密耶？

有解云：有義則疏，是義則密。釋難眾生則是佛為密，有性不密者，眾生則佛性義深，眾生有佛性不深。經云：眾生有佛性甚深，既有性為深，何意有佛性非密，不見好

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：又有人提出疑問：如果過去的無常覆蓋了現在的常，那麼就不會覆蓋過去的常；如果過去的無常消除了現在的常，那麼就不會消除過去的常。過去應該禁止乳製品，那麼過去就應該普遍地消除常。而且，如果無常覆蓋了現在的常，在還沒有說到現在的常的時候，怎麼能說覆蓋了現在的常呢？之前說無常的時候，可以用現在的常來覆蓋過去的無常，但過去的無常還沒有現在的常，怎麼能說過去的無常覆蓋了現在的常呢？ 解釋這個問題就像上面所說的，諸佛本來就是常，過去隱藏起來不能說常，只能說無常，所以說無常覆蓋了常。 然而，這種開顯和覆蓋就是如來藏（Tathagatagarbha）的意義。 為什麼叫做如來藏呢？是說眾生藏著如來，所以叫做『如來藏』；還是說如來自藏，所以叫做『如來藏』呢？實際上，就在這裡，就已經解釋完畢了。然而，這裡包含了兩種含義：一是眾生的自性顛倒，隱蔽覆蓋瞭如來的自性，所以叫做『如來藏』；二是眾生無法承受聽聞如來的自性，所以隱藏而不說，也叫做『如來藏』。 現在教導說一切眾生都有佛性（Buddha-nature），佛性是『我』的意義。眾生依靠方等大乘的教法，臨近解脫，斷除顛倒，就顯現出如來藏。如來藏顯現出來就叫做法身（Dharmakaya）。顯現眾生有佛性，就顯現眾生是佛性的根本。眾生是佛，所以有佛性，不是佛就不能有佛性。比如一個人姓張，那麼他的兒子就有張姓，不是姓張的人就不能有張姓，佛性也是這樣。 所以論中說：不是眾生的身內有佛，這並非秘密；身外有佛，這也不是秘密；這四種情況都不是秘密。眾生就是佛，這才是秘密。 有時會有人質疑這個意義，為什麼說有佛性不是秘密，而眾生就是佛才是秘密呢？ 有一種解釋說：有義則疏，是義則密。解釋質疑說眾生就是佛才是秘密，有佛性不秘密，是因為眾生就是佛的意義深刻，眾生有佛性的意義不深刻。《經》中說：眾生有佛性非常深刻，既然有佛性是深刻的，為什麼說有佛性不是秘密呢？你沒有看到好的一面。

【English Translation】 English version: Furthermore, it is questioned: If the past impermanence covers the present permanence, then it would not cover the past permanence; if the past impermanence eliminates the present permanence, then it would not eliminate the past permanence. In the past, it should have been forbidden to consume dairy products, then in the past, permanence should have been universally eliminated. Moreover, if impermanence covers the present permanence, how can it be said to cover the present permanence when the present permanence has not yet been mentioned? When impermanence was mentioned earlier, the present permanence could be used to cover the past impermanence, but the past impermanence did not yet have the present permanence, so how can it be said that the past impermanence covers the present permanence? The explanation of this is as mentioned above, all Buddhas are inherently permanent. In the past, it was hidden and could not be said to be permanent, so only impermanence was spoken of. Therefore, it is said that impermanence covers permanence. However, this revealing and covering is the meaning of the Tathagatagarbha (如來藏). Why is it called Tathagatagarbha? Is it because sentient beings store the Tathagata (如來), hence the name 'Tathagatagarbha'; or is it because the Tathagata stores itself, hence the name 'Tathagatagarbha'? In reality, right here, the explanation is already complete. However, it contains two meanings: first, the nature of sentient beings is inverted, concealing and covering the nature of the Tathagata, hence the name 'Tathagatagarbha'; second, sentient beings are unable to bear hearing the nature of the Tathagata, so it is hidden and not spoken of, also called 'Tathagatagarbha'. Now it is taught that all sentient beings have Buddha-nature (佛性), and Buddha-nature is the meaning of 'self'. Sentient beings rely on the Vaipulya Sutras (方等大乘) teachings, approaching liberation, cutting off inversion, and then the Tathagatagarbha is revealed. When the Tathagatagarbha is revealed, it is called Dharmakaya (法身). Revealing that sentient beings have Buddha-nature reveals that sentient beings are the root of Buddha-nature. Sentient beings are Buddhas, therefore they have Buddha-nature; if they are not Buddhas, they cannot have Buddha-nature. For example, if a person's surname is Zhang, then his son will have the surname Zhang; if he is not surnamed Zhang, he cannot have the surname Zhang. Buddha-nature is also like this. Therefore, the treatise says: It is not that there is a Buddha within the body of sentient beings, this is not a secret; nor is there a Buddha outside the body, this is also not a secret; these four situations are not secrets. Sentient beings are Buddhas, this is the secret. Sometimes people question this meaning, why is it said that having Buddha-nature is not a secret, but sentient beings being Buddhas is the secret? One explanation says: Having the meaning is sparse, being the meaning is secret. Explaining the question that sentient beings being Buddhas is the secret, having Buddha-nature is not secret, is because the meaning of sentient beings being Buddhas is profound, the meaning of sentient beings having Buddha-nature is not profound. The Sutra says: Sentient beings having Buddha-nature is very profound, since having Buddha-nature is profound, why is it said that having Buddha-nature is not a secret? You do not see the good side.

---

解(扶解孝奉落：疏密之語不言深不深者，如人。二人相近，即言密，不得言深。若向何得言深淺？是亦如此。眾生即佛性，即相密；若單論佛性，即深。經云眾生有佛性甚深，是約佛性為言；眾生即佛者，是約眾生為論。所以眾生外，更無佛性。故即是佛性與眾生不疏為密。是密義甚深，故有佛性甚深者乎云)。

問：地論亦隱顯義，與今何異？

解云：語雖同其意大異。彼有如來藏體，為妄所覆名之為隱，復則現出此體名之為顯。如貧女寶藏，暗室瓶瓫，則用此譬為義。

今則不爾。此譬為破始有，故言本有，豈可守斯為定耶？今明只迷故名隱名藏，豈尚別有此體可隱？只悟故名顯，名法身無體可顯。迷故名隱，隱無所隱；悟故名顯，顯無所顯。只迷因緣故隱，悟因緣故名顯。如箜喉之喻，無乎無棍等因緣則無聲，為隱，無別聲可隱在內；若因緣具足，聲則便出，無別聲可顯。如來藏隱顯亦爾，不了因緣故隱，顯又如此，隱顯並出于緣。緣未堪如此說，故為隱；今皆聞之，故不隱。乃出於緣，法身更何隱顯也！

四、次半滿義。

他云：昔無常為「半」，今常為「滿」。

此有種種計不同：或云《般若》已上，《法華》已來是無常「半教」；唯《涅槃》常住，乃為「滿」字

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：解釋（扶解孝奉落：疏密的說法不談深不深，就像人一樣。兩個人靠近，就說密，不能說深。如果問從何處能說深淺？也是如此。眾生即是佛性，這是相密；如果單單討論佛性，那就是深。經書上說眾生有佛性甚深，這是就佛性而言；眾生即是佛，這是就眾生來論。所以眾生之外，再沒有佛性。因此就是佛性和眾生不疏遠為密。這個密的意義非常深，所以才有佛性甚深的說法）。

問：地論也講隱顯的意義，和現在說的有什麼不同？

解釋說：說法雖然相同，但意義大不相同。他們認為有如來藏的本體，被虛妄所覆蓋，叫做隱；去除覆蓋就顯現出這個本體，叫做顯。比如貧女的寶藏，暗室里的瓶瓶罐罐，就用這些比喻來解釋這個意義。

現在則不是這樣。這些比喻是爲了破除始有的觀點，所以說是本有，難道可以固守這種說法嗎？現在說明只是因為迷惑所以叫做隱，叫做藏，難道還有別的本體可以隱藏嗎？只是因為覺悟所以叫做顯，叫做法身，沒有本體可以顯現。因為迷惑所以叫做隱，隱沒有可以隱的東西；因為覺悟所以叫做顯，顯沒有可以顯的東西。只是因為迷惑的因緣所以隱，因為覺悟的因緣所以叫做顯。比如箜篌的比喻，沒有箜篌和棍等因緣就沒有聲音，這是隱，沒有別的聲音可以隱藏在裡面；如果因緣具足，聲音就發出來，沒有別的聲音可以顯現。如來藏的隱顯也是這樣，不瞭解因緣所以隱，顯也是如此，隱顯都出于因緣。因緣還不成熟的時候這樣說，所以說是隱；現在大家都聽到了，所以不隱。既然出於因緣，法身還有什麼隱顯可言呢！

四、其次是半滿的意義。

他們說：過去無常是『半』，現在常是『滿』。

對此有種種不同的說法：有人說《般若經》以上，《法華經》以下是無常的『半教』；只有《涅槃經》常住，才是『滿』字。

【English Translation】 English version: Explanation (Fu Jie Xiao Feng Luo: The language of closeness and distance does not speak of depth or lack thereof, like people. When two people are close, we say 'close,' not 'deep.' If asked from where can we speak of depth? It is the same. Sentient beings are Buddha-nature, which is closeness; if we only discuss Buddha-nature, then it is depth. The scriptures say that sentient beings have a very deep Buddha-nature, which is spoken of in terms of Buddha-nature; sentient beings are Buddhas, which is discussed in terms of sentient beings. Therefore, outside of sentient beings, there is no Buddha-nature. Thus, Buddha-nature and sentient beings are not distant but close. The meaning of this closeness is very deep, hence the saying that Buddha-nature is very deep).

Question: The Dilun (Treatise on the Ten Grounds) also speaks of the meaning of hidden and manifest, how is it different from what is being said now?

Explanation: Although the words are the same, the meaning is very different. They believe that there is a Tathagatagarbha (Tathagata-embryo) essence, which is covered by delusion and is called hidden; when the covering is removed, this essence appears and is called manifest. For example, the treasure of a poor woman, the bottles and jars in a dark room, these metaphors are used to explain this meaning.

Now it is not like this. These metaphors are to refute the view of something being newly created, so it is said to be originally existent, but can we hold onto this as a fixed view? Now it is explained that it is only because of delusion that it is called hidden, called a treasure, is there still another essence that can be hidden? It is only because of enlightenment that it is called manifest, called Dharmakaya (Dharma-body), there is no essence that can be manifested. Because of delusion it is called hidden, hidden with nothing to hide; because of enlightenment it is called manifest, manifest with nothing to manifest. It is only because of the causes and conditions of delusion that it is hidden, because of the causes and conditions of enlightenment that it is called manifest. Like the metaphor of the konghou (Chinese harp), without the konghou and the stick and other causes and conditions, there is no sound, this is hidden, there is no other sound that can be hidden inside; if the causes and conditions are complete, the sound will come out, there is no other sound that can be manifested. The hidden and manifest of the Tathagatagarbha is also like this, not understanding the causes and conditions, so it is hidden, and the manifest is also like this, the hidden and manifest both come from causes and conditions. When the causes and conditions are not yet ripe, it is said like this, so it is hidden; now everyone has heard it, so it is not hidden. Since it comes from causes and conditions, what hidden and manifest is there in the Dharmakaya!

Four, next is the meaning of partial and complete.

They say: In the past, impermanence was 'partial,' now permanence is 'complete.'

There are various different views on this: some say that the Prajna Sutra (Perfection of Wisdom Sutra) and above, and the Lotus Sutra and below, are the impermanent 'partial teaching'; only the Nirvana Sutra (Sutra of Nirvana) is permanent, and is the 'complete' word.

---

。難(云云)。

又，彼明常無常云：斷明義，生死「無常」不通「常」；涅槃「常」不通「無常」。乃至金剛心無常不通「常」，佛果常不通「無常」。

如此一握「無常」，一握是「常」。無常一握既「半」，常是一握亦「半」。今一家有時對此牽生死無常至佛果「常」，牽佛果常至生死「無常」，令彼兩處互通。無常邊亦「滿」，常邊亦「滿」。

一家云：半邊滿，滿邊半。此非互語「半三斗，三斗半」，亦如「山在南，在山南」，豈可為一？

今滿半、半滿亦有異義。但此「有為」意：

一者「滿半」圓偏語，「半滿」積足語。

「滿半」圓偏語者，明涅槃本來具足，緣未巧具聞圓旨，故說「無常」一邊名為「半」字。故經問：「云何解『滿』字及與『半』字義亦得道？云何解『半』字及與『滿』字義？但今得意，明涅槃具足圓滿。」為緣說「半」，故言「滿半」也。「半滿」是積足者，「無常」是「半」，「常」足為「滿」。「常」亦爾，故定知「半滿」大師戲言耳。

又，「滿半」是圓偏語，如前「半滿」是對治語。何者？汝言「常」是「滿」者，此「半邊滿」耳，有時明「常、無常」名「半邊滿」，「常、無常」雙用名「滿邊半」也。

但一家釋「

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 難（如上所述）。 又，他們闡明常與無常時說：斷滅之義，生死是『無常』（anitya，指事物變化無常的狀態），不能通達『常』（nitya，指事物恒常不變的狀態）；涅槃（nirvana，指解脫后的境界）是『常』，不能通達『無常』。乃至金剛心（vajra-citta，指堅固不壞的菩提心）是無常，不能通達『常』，佛果（Buddha-phala，指成佛的果位）是常，不能通達『無常』。 如此，一手握住『無常』，一手握住『常』。無常的一握既然是『一半』，常的一握也是『一半』。現在有人將生死無常牽引至佛果的『常』，將佛果的常牽引至生死的『無常』，使這兩處互通。無常的一邊也『滿』，常的一邊也『滿』。 有人說：半邊是滿，滿邊是半。這並非像互相說『半三斗，三斗半』，也像『山在南，在山南』，怎麼能算作一回事呢？ 現在，滿半、半滿也有不同的意義。但這是『有為』（saṃskṛta，指由因緣和合而成的、會變化的）的含義： 一是『滿半』是圓偏之語，『半滿』是積足之語。 『滿半』是圓偏之語，說明涅槃本來具足，因為沒有巧妙地聽聞圓滿的旨意，所以說『無常』一邊名為『半』字。所以經中問：『如何理解『滿』字的意義，以及『半』字的意義也能得道？如何理解『半』字的意義，以及『滿』字的意義？』但現在領會其意，說明涅槃具足圓滿。因為緣故說『半』，所以說『滿半』。『半滿』是積足，『無常』是『半』，『常』補足為『滿』。『常』也是如此，所以必定知道『半滿』是大士的戲言罷了。 又，『滿半』是圓偏之語，如前，『半滿』是對治之語。為什麼呢？你說『常』是『滿』，這只是『半邊滿』罷了，有時說明『常、無常』名為『半邊滿』，『常、無常』雙用名為『滿邊半』。 但有人解釋『

【English Translation】 English version: Difficult (as mentioned above). Furthermore, when they explain permanence and impermanence, they say: The meaning of annihilation, 'impermanence' (anitya, referring to the state of constant change in things) in birth and death does not extend to 'permanence' (nitya, referring to the unchanging state of things); 'permanence' in Nirvana (nirvana, referring to the state after liberation) does not extend to 'impermanence'. Even the vajra-citta (vajra-citta, referring to the indestructible Bodhi mind) is impermanent and does not extend to 'permanence', and the Buddha-phala (Buddha-phala, referring to the fruit of Buddhahood) is permanent and does not extend to 'impermanence'. Thus, one hand grasps 'impermanence', and the other hand grasps 'permanence'. Since one grasp of impermanence is 'half', one grasp of permanence is also 'half'. Now, some people drag the impermanence of birth and death to the 'permanence' of the Buddha-phala, and drag the permanence of the Buddha-phala to the 'impermanence' of birth and death, making these two places interconnected. The side of impermanence is also 'full', and the side of permanence is also 'full'. Someone says: Half the side is full, and the full side is half. This is not like saying to each other 'half three pecks, three and a half pecks', or like 'the mountain is in the south, in the south of the mountain', how can it be considered the same thing? Now, 'full-half' and 'half-full' also have different meanings. But this is the meaning of 'conditioned' (saṃskṛta, referring to things that are formed by the combination of causes and conditions and are subject to change): First, 'full-half' is a word of round partiality, and 'half-full' is a word of accumulated sufficiency. 'Full-half' is a word of round partiality, explaining that Nirvana is originally complete, but because one has not skillfully heard the complete meaning, the side of 'impermanence' is called the word 'half'. Therefore, the sutra asks: 'How can one understand the meaning of the word 'full', and also attain the Way by understanding the meaning of the word 'half'? How can one understand the meaning of the word 'half', and also understand the meaning of the word 'full'?' But now understand its meaning, explaining that Nirvana is complete and perfect. Because of the reason for saying 'half', it is called 'full-half'. 'Half-full' is accumulated sufficiency, 'impermanence' is 'half', and 'permanence' completes it as 'full'. 'Permanence' is also like this, so it must be known that 'half-full' is just the playful words of a great being. Also, 'full-half' is a word of round partiality, as before, 'half-full' is a word of counteraction. Why? You say that 'permanence' is 'full', this is just 'half the side is full', sometimes explaining 'permanence and impermanence' is called 'half the side is full', and using 'permanence and impermanence' together is called 'the full side is half'. But someone explains '

---

半滿」復有展轉明義。一、無常為「半」常為「半」，無常為「半」常為「滿」；二、常無常皆「半」，是常無常所，病皆洗除，盡名之為「滿」；三者、常無常用「半」，非常非無常體「滿」。體用異故，此體用、用體具足始為「滿」。

無常為「半」，常為「滿」，別二邊高下。若非常非無常，常無常具足，別二邊雙游也。

大師明無常復有四種：一病藥，二開覆，三半滿，四二邊。此四句無常云何不別？

解云：病藥無常者，以無常治常，常病既去，無常之藥亦除。如三修耶，常雖去猶存無常，故成尤疾。所以文云王今病重故也。此一向須寫寫矣。

開覆無常如前，以無常覆常，復是道無常者，常不除無常也。

半滿無常，昔說無常為半，今還明無常為滿。又昔說無常不了故為半，今明無常顯了，生死無常、佛果常住，字義具足為滿也。

二邊無常者，此二恒俱，豈得除無常明常？但二邊有前後，尤有高下，充並充等義。

第二明經宗旨。

古來明宗體異，以常住為宗，文言為體。

今一家明只宗是體，豈異體別有宗？大師云：今解釋此，茲國所無。汝何處得此義耶？云稟關河，傳於攝領，攝領得大乘之正意者。若是諸師皆悉推片，不熟看經論，妄引

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 「半滿」還有輾轉相明的意義。一、無常為『半』，常為『半』，無常為『半』，常為『滿』；二、常無常皆『半』，是常無常所，病皆洗除，盡名之為『滿』；三者、常無常用『半』，非常非無常體『滿』。體用不同，此體用、用體具足才為『滿』。 無常為『半』，常為『滿』，區別二邊的上下。若非常非無常，常無常具足，區別二邊雙游也。 大師闡明無常又有四種：一、病藥，二、開覆，三、半滿，四、二邊。這四句無常如何區分？ 解釋說：病藥無常，是用無常來治療常，常的病既然去除，無常的藥也去除。如三修耶（Sanxiu ye），常雖然去除，但還存在無常，所以成為更嚴重的疾病。所以經文說國王現在病重。這一向必須寫清楚。 開覆無常如前所述，用無常覆蓋常，又是道無常，常不去除無常。 半滿無常，過去說無常為半，現在還闡明無常為滿。又過去說無常不徹底所以為半，現在闡明無常顯現明瞭，生死是無常的，佛果是常住的，字義具足為滿。 二邊無常，這二者恒常並存，怎麼能去除無常來闡明常？但二邊有先後，尤其有高下，包含並列等意義。 第二，闡明經的宗旨。 古來闡明宗和體是不同的，以常住為宗，文言為體。 現在一家闡明宗就是體，難道除了體還有別的宗？大師說：現在解釋這些，是這個國家所沒有的。你從哪裡得到這些意義？回答說：稟承關河，傳於攝領（Sheling），攝領得到大乘的正意。如果這些法師都推卸責任，不仔細看經論，胡亂引用。

【English Translation】 English version The meaning of 'half-full' can also be clarified through mutual explanation. First, impermanence is 'half,' permanence is 'half'; impermanence is 'half,' permanence is 'full.' Second, both permanence and impermanence are 'half'; when permanence and impermanence are present, all illnesses are washed away, and this is called 'full.' Third, permanence and impermanence use 'half,' while the non-permanent and non-impermanent substance is 'full.' Because substance and function are different, only when this substance and function, and function and substance are complete, can it be called 'full.' Impermanence is 'half,' permanence is 'full,' distinguishing the high and low of the two extremes. If it is neither permanent nor impermanent, and permanence and impermanence are complete, it distinguishes the dualistic wandering. The great master clarifies that impermanence has four types: first, illness and medicine; second, opening and covering; third, half-full; and fourth, two extremes. How are these four statements about impermanence distinguished? The explanation says: Impermanence as illness and medicine means using impermanence to treat permanence. Once the illness of permanence is removed, the medicine of impermanence is also removed. Like Sanxiu ye (Sanxiu ye), although permanence is removed, impermanence still exists, thus becoming an even more serious illness. Therefore, the text says that the king is now seriously ill. This must be written clearly. Opening and covering impermanence is as mentioned before, using impermanence to cover permanence, and it is also the impermanence of the path, where permanence does not remove impermanence. Half-full impermanence: in the past, impermanence was said to be half, but now it is clarified that impermanence is full. Also, in the past, impermanence was said to be incomplete, so it was half. Now it is clarified that impermanence is manifest and clear, that birth and death are impermanent, and the Buddha-fruit is permanent, so the meaning of the words is complete, and it is full. Two extremes of impermanence: these two always coexist. How can one remove impermanence to clarify permanence? But the two extremes have before and after, and especially high and low, including parallel meanings. Second, clarify the purpose of the sutra. In the past, it was clarified that the doctrine and the substance are different, with permanence as the doctrine and the written words as the substance. Now, one school clarifies that the doctrine is the substance. Is there a separate doctrine besides the substance? The great master says: Now explaining these, this country does not have them. Where did you get these meanings? The answer is: Receiving from Guanhe, transmitted to Sheling (Sheling), Sheling obtained the correct meaning of Mahayana. If these Dharma masters all shirk responsibility, do not carefully read the sutras and treatises, and quote recklessly.

---

候文，失於圓旨。

如聞佛性者名第一義空，便種種解釋，或云從境為名，或云即于真諦。彼云：佛性是智，第一義空是境，但智即境，故云佛性名第一義空。又云：佛性是俗諦，但俗即真故，云佛性名第一義空也。今明此語未足。佛性者名第一義空，智者見空及以不空，此始成一句耳，是故發初與他異。

他明此經以常為宗，今初辨常者，乃倒寫之用，未是正意。常是藥用，豈會開正宗？前藥治前病，后藥治后病。常是藥用，常為宗者；無常是藥，亦應以無常為宗。

彼云：后藥治后病，后藥為后經宗；前藥治前病，前藥為前經宗。今明前藥為前經宗，前經有無量種，豈得並以無常為經前宗？既不可無常為宗，后經寧得以常為宗？今對彼故以無得為宗，汝以常為宗，文何所出？

我今依經文自云：「無得者名大涅槃」，故無所得此經宗也。又亦汝言涅槃定常不得無常，斯則常故，常名有所得；有所得者，乃名生死，何謂涅槃？

彼云我亦有得、無得義。至忘為無得，彌存為有得。今責汝妄不可為存，存不可為妄。真絕不可待，俗待不可絕。還成有所得。何謂無得耶？

又，彼義真諦中不得有樂，不得有一乘也；我、樂、一乘並是世諦；又，于汝證言生死無常，涅槃是常，大眾

聞之何所悟？故云涅槃不可定常，不可定無常，非待非不待，不可思議，聞者悟也！

只無所得故不可思議，無所得為經宗也。

他難云：汝以無得釋經宗為是者，我亦以常釋經宗亦是。

解云：常無常雖經說，而有病故，則無所得義生。經云：雖不常住非唸唸滅，此已常無常兩除。

次復明涅槃非常無常，常無常俱洗。如〈德王〉中說：何偏得以常為宗耶？無得之義，始終無行，故以為宗也。

問：有得名生死，無得名涅槃，則有得名無常，無得名為常，得無得還是常無常。云何舍常、無常而用得、無得耶？

解云：若定用無得為是還成有得，不名無所得。一無所依乃名無得，無得通常無常。何者？彼云生死無常、涅槃常，如此常無常並有所得；今明常明無常，因緣假名字說，無有無常可有，亦無有常之可得。一無所住故名無所得也。

又，他常無常智斷明義，生死無常涅槃常。前心無常後心常，故是有所得。今明諸法未曾常、無常，或說常或說無常，諸法實相行常無常也。

然無所得非但是此經宗，通是一切大乘之正意也。

第三釋名。此中復為三：第一明異名，第二翻名，第三絕名。

初明異名者：或雲泥洹，或雲泥曰。肇師云：「彼國楚夏不

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：聽聞之後領悟了什麼？所以說涅槃（Nirvana，佛教術語，指解脫后的境界）不可被定義為恒常，也不可被定義為無常，既非依賴也非不依賴，是不可思議的，聽聞者才能領悟！ 正因為沒有任何執取，所以才是不可思議的，『無所得』是這部經的宗旨。 對方反駁說：你用『無所得』來解釋經的宗旨，認為是正確的，那我用『常』來解釋經的宗旨也是正確的。 解釋說：『常』和『無常』雖然經中有所提及，但因為存在弊病，所以才生出『無所得』的意義。經中說：『雖不常住，也非唸唸滅』，這已經將『常』和『無常』兩種觀點都排除了。 進一步說明涅槃既非恒常也非無常，『常』和『無常』都被洗滌乾淨。如同《德王》中所說：為什麼偏偏要以『常』作為宗旨呢？『無所得』的意義，自始至終都沒有任何執著，所以才以此作為宗旨。 問：有所得名為生死，無所得名為涅槃，那麼有所得名為無常，無所得名為常，那麼得與無得還是常與無常。為什麼要捨棄常、無常而用得、無得呢？ 解釋說：如果一定要執著于『無所得』，那就反而成了『有得』，不能稱為『無所得』。沒有任何依賴才能稱為『無得』，『無得』通於『常』和『無常』。為什麼這麼說呢？他們說生死是無常的，涅槃是常的，這樣『常』和『無常』都是有所得的；現在說明『常』和『無常』，都是因緣假借名字而說，沒有真正的無常可以得到，也沒有真正的常可以得到。沒有任何執住，所以才稱為『無所得』。 此外，他們用常無常的智慧來判斷明義，認為生死是無常的，涅槃是常的。前一念是無常的，后一念是常的，所以是有所得。現在說明諸法未曾是常，也未曾是無常，或者說常，或者說無常，諸法的實相超越常與無常。 然而，『無所得』不僅僅是這部經的宗旨，也是一切大乘佛法的真正意旨。 第三，解釋名稱。其中又分為三點：第一，說明不同的名稱；第二，翻譯名稱；第三，超越名稱。 首先說明不同的名稱：或者稱為泥洹（Nirvana的音譯），或者稱為泥曰（Nirvana的音譯）。鳩摩羅什大師說：「那個國家（指印度）的方言不同，所以翻譯也不同。」

【English Translation】 English version: What is realized upon hearing this? Therefore, it is said that Nirvana (Nirvana, a Buddhist term referring to the state of liberation) cannot be defined as constant, nor can it be defined as impermanent. It is neither dependent nor independent, it is inconceivable, and only those who hear it can realize it! It is precisely because there is no attachment that it is inconceivable. 'Non-attainment' is the doctrine of this scripture. The opponent argues: If you use 'non-attainment' to explain the doctrine of the scripture and consider it correct, then I can also use 'permanence' to explain the doctrine of the scripture and it would also be correct. The explanation is: Although 'permanence' and 'impermanence' are mentioned in the scripture, they have flaws, so the meaning of 'non-attainment' arises. The scripture says: 'Although it is not permanent, it is not annihilated in every moment,' which has already eliminated both views of 'permanence' and 'impermanence'. Furthermore, it clarifies that Nirvana is neither permanent nor impermanent; both 'permanence' and 'impermanence' are washed away. As stated in the 'King of Merit' chapter: Why insist on taking 'permanence' as the doctrine? The meaning of 'non-attainment' has no attachment from beginning to end, so it is taken as the doctrine. Question: Attainment is called Samsara (birth and death), non-attainment is called Nirvana, then attainment is called impermanence, and non-attainment is called permanence. Why abandon permanence and impermanence and use attainment and non-attainment? The explanation is: If one insists on 'non-attainment', it becomes 'attainment' and cannot be called 'non-attainment'. Only when there is no reliance can it be called 'non-attainment'. 'Non-attainment' encompasses both 'permanence' and 'impermanence'. Why is that? They say that Samsara is impermanent and Nirvana is permanent, so both 'permanence' and 'impermanence' are attainments. Now, clarifying permanence and impermanence are just provisional names based on conditions; there is no real impermanence to be attained, nor is there real permanence to be attained. Because there is no dwelling, it is called 'non-attainment'. Moreover, they use the wisdom of permanence and impermanence to judge the meaning, believing that Samsara is impermanent and Nirvana is permanent. The previous thought is impermanent, and the subsequent thought is permanent, so there is attainment. Now, it is clarified that phenomena have never been permanent or impermanent. Sometimes permanence is spoken of, and sometimes impermanence is spoken of. The true nature of phenomena transcends permanence and impermanence. However, 'non-attainment' is not only the doctrine of this scripture but also the true intention of all Mahayana Buddhism. Third, explaining the name. This is further divided into three points: first, explaining different names; second, translating the name; third, transcending the name. First, explaining different names: It is sometimes called Nirvāna (transliteration of Nirvana), or Nirvāna (transliteration of Nirvana). Master Kumarajiva said, 'The dialects of that country (referring to India) are different, so the translations are also different.'

---

同耳」。大亮云：「涅槃者異俗之音，音有楚夏，涅槃正中天竺之音也」。或云：「此三名目於三本，《泥曰》此是中本，《泥洹》是六卷經，《涅槃》則此大本」。今謂未必然也。大本亦得名大泥洹經也。

次翻名。且明摩訶義，此是外國音。此雖有三義，正翻為大。《金光明》云：「摩訶提婆此云大天」。又今既標大意，何須更標？但大有多義，依此經凡有六義：

一常故大。所言大者，名之為常。然無常二得名大，而終不及常。大薪大火。大薪不及火，常無常亦爾也。

二者廣故大。所以然者，經云：所言大者，其性廣博，廣博故大也。

三者高故名大。經云：譬如大山，一切世人所不能上，故名大山；涅槃亦爾，聲聞緣覺及諸菩薩所不能上，是故名大。

四、深故大。經云：大名不可思議，一切世人所不能測，是故名大也。

五者多故名大。經云：譬如大城，多諸珍寶故名大城；涅槃亦爾，多諸法寶故名為大。

六者勝故名大。譬如有人，於人中勝故名大；涅槃亦爾，勝於一切，故名為大也。

雖有六大名不出二種：一體大，二用大。體大者則是法性也，涅槃者則諸佛之法性也。用大者八自在我故名用大也。

又有二大：一待大、二絕大，然此無二

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『同耳』。大亮說：『涅槃（Nirvana）是不同於世俗的讀音，讀音有楚地和夏地的不同，涅槃是正統的中天竺（India）的讀音。』有人說：『這三個名稱在三個版本中，《泥曰》是中本，《泥洹》是六卷經，《涅槃》是此大本。』現在認為不一定如此。大本也可以叫做大泥洹經。

接下來翻譯名稱。先說明摩訶（Mahā）的含義，這是外國語音。雖然有三種含義，但正譯為『大』。《金光明經》（Suvarnaprabhāsa Sūtra）說：『摩訶提婆（Mahādeva）這裡譯為大天。』而且現在已經標明大意，何須再標明？但『大』有很多含義，依據此經，凡有六種含義：

一、常故大。所說的大，名為常。然而無常二者不能稱為大，最終不及常。大柴和大火。大柴不及火，常與無常也是如此。

二、廣故大。之所以這樣說，經中說：所說的大，其性廣博，廣博所以大。

三、高故名大。經中說：譬如大山，一切世人所不能登上，所以名為大山；涅槃也是這樣，聲聞（Śrāvaka）、緣覺（Pratyekabuddha）以及諸菩薩（Bodhisattva）所不能登上，所以名為大。

四、深故大。經中說：大名為不可思議，一切世人所不能測度，所以名為大。

五、多故名大。經中說：譬如大城，多諸珍寶所以名為大城；涅槃也是這樣，多諸法寶所以名為大。

六、勝故名大。譬如有人，在人中勝出所以名為大；涅槃也是這樣，勝於一切，所以名為大。

雖然有六種『大』，名稱不出兩種：一體大，二用大。體大就是法性（Dharmatā），涅槃就是諸佛的法性。用大就是八自在，所以名為用大。

又有二種『大』：一待大、二絕大，然而這裡沒有這兩種。

【English Translation】 English version: 『Same ear』. Da Liang said: 『Nirvana (Nirvana) is a sound different from the secular, and the pronunciation varies between Chu and Xia. Nirvana is the orthodox pronunciation of Central India (India).』 Someone said: 『These three names appear in three versions. 『Ni Yue』 is the middle version, 『Niyuan』 is the six-fascicle scripture, and 『Nirvana』 is this great version.』 Now it is considered not necessarily so. The great version can also be called the Great Niyuan Sutra.

Next, translate the name. First, explain the meaning of Mahā (Mahā), which is a foreign sound. Although it has three meanings, it is correctly translated as 『Great』. The Suvarnaprabhāsa Sūtra says: 『Mahādeva (Mahādeva) is translated here as Great Heaven.』 Moreover, since the main idea has already been indicated, why indicate it again? But 『Great』 has many meanings, according to this sutra, there are six meanings:

First, great because of permanence. What is called great is named permanence. However, impermanence cannot be called great, and ultimately cannot match permanence. Great firewood and great fire. Great firewood is not as good as fire, and permanence and impermanence are also like this.

Second, great because of vastness. The reason for this is that the sutra says: What is called great, its nature is vast and broad, so it is great.

Third, great because of height. The sutra says: For example, a great mountain, which all people cannot climb, is called a great mountain; Nirvana is also like this, Śrāvakas (Śrāvakā), Pratyekabuddhas (Pratyekabuddha), and all Bodhisattvas (Bodhisattva) cannot climb it, so it is called great.

Fourth, great because of depth. The sutra says: The name 『Great』 is inconceivable, and all people cannot fathom it, so it is called great.

Fifth, great because of abundance. The sutra says: For example, a great city, which is called a great city because of its many treasures; Nirvana is also like this, it is called great because of its many Dharma treasures.

Sixth, great because of superiority. For example, a person who is superior among people is called great; Nirvana is also like this, it is superior to everything, so it is called great.

Although there are six kinds of 『Great』, the names do not go beyond two types: Great in essence and Great in function. Great in essence is Dharmatā (Dharmatā), and Nirvana is the Dharmatā of all Buddhas. Great in function is the eightfold sovereignty, so it is called great in function.

There are also two kinds of 『Great』: relative great and absolute great, but there are not these two here.

---

，只待則絕因緣則空故也。

次明涅槃義。前摩訶題既標大更無異釋，翻涅槃則眾解不同，或言無翻、言有翻。

今略出無翻四師，有翻六師。

無翻四師者：

第一、大亮師明涅槃無翻。彼云：涅槃是如來神通之極號，常樂八味之都名。涅槃是異俗之名，名有楚夏，前後互出乃有三名。涅槃正是中天竺之音名含眾義，此方無一名以譯之，存其胡本焉。此遠述河西乃至大濟，皆同此說也。

第二、瑤師亦云無翻。彼師序云：稱包眾理，名冠眾義，一名之中有無量名，楚音無以譯其稱，晉言無以代其號者，故不可翻。

第三、寶亮師亦云不可翻。彼序云：涅槃是出世法總名，貫眾法之通號。然此之語乃方土之音，聖既出彼國，此亦無名以正翻，但文酬況指，義釋而已。

第四、知秀師亦云不可翻。彼師序云：涅槃是圓極至住之總名也，然因跡見名，見名知本。名跡之興肇自天竺，我大梁亦應有稱。但弘道之近，既發軫西域于未測，此方以「伊」譯翻，是以前賢后哲，皆順舊本述而不作，故題之經道。

此四師並云涅槃不可翻。彼明不可翻有文有義：義者，涅槃是圓德，圓德立圓名，故不可一名翻；二者有文者，三點成涅槃，故不可一名翻也。

今作五難難云：

【現代漢語翻譯】 只等待，那麼因緣就會斷絕，因緣斷絕則一切皆空。

接下來闡明涅槃（Nirvana，寂滅）的含義。前面摩訶題（Mahamati，大慧）已經標明了『大』，沒有其他的解釋。翻譯涅槃則眾說紛紜，有的說不翻譯，有的說可以翻譯。

現在簡要列出主張不翻譯的四位法師，以及主張翻譯的六位法師。

主張不翻譯的四位法師：

第一位，大亮法師認為涅槃不可翻譯。他認為：『涅槃是如來神通的極致稱號，是常樂（eternal bliss）八味的總體名稱。涅槃是不同於世俗的名稱，名稱有楚夏之分，前後交替出現就有三個名稱。涅槃正是中天竺的語音，名稱包含眾多含義，此地沒有一個名稱可以翻譯它，所以保留它的梵文原貌。』這種說法從河西一直到大濟，都相同。

第二位，瑤法師也認為不可翻譯。他的序言中說：『名稱包含眾多道理，名稱涵蓋眾多含義，一個名稱之中有無量名稱，楚地的語音無法翻譯它的稱號，晉地的語言無法代替它的名稱，所以不可翻譯。』

第三位，寶亮法師也認為不可翻譯。他的序言中說：『涅槃是出世間法的總名稱，貫穿眾多法的通用稱號。然而這種語言是地方的語音，聖人既然出自那個國家，這裡也沒有名稱可以準確翻譯，只能用文字來比擬，用義理來解釋而已。』

第四位，知秀法師也認為不可翻譯。他的序言中說：『涅槃是圓滿、極致、安住的總名稱。然而因事蹟而顯現名稱，見名稱而知根本。名稱事蹟的興起，開始於天竺，我們大梁也應該有相應的稱謂。但是弘揚佛法的途徑相近，既然發源于西域，在未完全瞭解的情況下，此地用「伊」來翻譯，所以前賢后哲，都順從舊本，只是闡述而不創作，所以題名為經道。』

這四位法師都認為涅槃不可翻譯。他們認為不可翻譯既有文的理由，也有義的理由：義的理由是，涅槃是圓滿的功德，圓滿的功德建立圓滿的名稱，所以不可用一個名稱來翻譯；文的理由是，『涅槃』二字由三點構成，所以不可用一個名稱來翻譯。

現在提出五點疑問來反駁他們：

【English Translation】 Only waiting, then the cause and condition will be cut off, and if the cause and condition are cut off, then everything is empty.

Next, explaining the meaning of Nirvana (extinction). Earlier, Mahamati (Great Wisdom) had already marked 'great,' and there is no other explanation. Translating Nirvana leads to various interpretations; some say it should not be translated, while others say it can be translated.

Now, briefly list the four teachers who advocate not translating, and the six teachers who advocate translating.

The four teachers who advocate not translating:

First, Master Daliang believes that Nirvana cannot be translated. He says: 'Nirvana is the ultimate title of the Tathagata's (Thus Come One) supernatural powers, the overall name of eternal bliss and the eight flavors. Nirvana is a name different from the mundane; names have distinctions between Chu and Xia (ancient Chinese states), and alternating between them results in three names. Nirvana is precisely the sound of Central India, and the name contains many meanings; this place does not have a single name to translate it, so its original Sanskrit form is retained.' This view is the same from Hexi to Daji.

Second, Master Yao also believes it cannot be translated. His preface says: 'The name encompasses many principles and covers many meanings; within one name, there are countless names. The language of Chu cannot translate its title, and the language of Jin cannot replace its name, so it cannot be translated.'

Third, Master Baoliang also believes it cannot be translated. His preface says: 'Nirvana is the general name for transcendental dharma (teachings), a common title that runs through many dharmas. However, this language is a local sound; since the sage (Buddha) came from that country, there is no name here to accurately translate it, so it can only be compared with words and explained with meaning.'

Fourth, Master Zhixiu also believes it cannot be translated. His preface says: 'Nirvana is the general name for perfect, ultimate, and abiding. However, names are revealed through events, and the root is known through names. The rise of names and events began in India, and our Great Liang should also have a corresponding term. However, since the path of propagating the Dharma is similar and originated in the Western Regions, and since it is not fully understood, this place uses '伊' (yi) to translate it. Therefore, previous sages and later wise men all followed the old version, only elaborating and not creating, so it is titled the Sutra Path.'

These four teachers all believe that Nirvana cannot be translated. They believe that there are both textual and meaningful reasons for not translating: the meaningful reason is that Nirvana is perfect virtue, and perfect virtue establishes a perfect name, so it cannot be translated with one name; the textual reason is that the word 'Nirvana' is composed of three dots, so it cannot be translated with one name.

Now, five questions are raised to refute them:

---

一、作大悲不等難。彼國有總名，此間無圓稱。如來但念彼土眾生不受此方，今殘彼有圓名解義，此無圓名則不解圓義，故悲不爾，涅槃來於此土便成無益也。

第二、就今昔相決難。今昔皆涅槃，應皆可翻。然今不可翻，可是涅槃；昔可翻，昔應非涅槃。昔不具足涅槃，今具足不可翻；昔不具足則可翻者，則難今具足可是涅槃，昔不具足應非涅槃。

第三、約摩訶難涅槃。涅槃是摩訶涅槃，涅槃既不可翻，摩訶是涅槃，摩訶涅槃亦不可翻。又，摩訶含三義，翻摩訶者涅槃含三德，亦一解說翻涅槃也，若言摩訶非圓名，涅槃是圓名者，此摩訶非涅槃摩訶，涅槃非摩訶涅槃也。涅槃含三德，名既圓；摩訶含三義，摩訶亦是圓名。皆不可翻也，皆可翻也。

第四、難涅槃不可翻，則涅槃一部並壞。涅槃發初，晨朝唱告般涅槃，一切大眾皆悉悲惱。純陀云：「雖知如來方便涅槃，而我等不能不懷悲惱」。既是眾德，大眾及純陀何事悲苦？又《現病品》云：「倚臥鶴樹間，下愚凡夫見尚言必涅槃」。若是眾德，下愚豈能得見？若見眾德，乃是上智，何故名下愚？故不可。

第五、總別難。彼有圓偏名，彼有總別；此但偏名無圓名，此但有別無總。此彼皆有總別名，彼此皆有圓偏名也。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 一、作大悲不等難。彼國有一個總的名稱，而我們這裡沒有一個完整的稱謂。如來只是考慮到那個世界的眾生不接受這個世界的（稱謂），現在保留那個世界完整的名稱是爲了理解其含義，而我們這裡沒有完整的名稱就無法理解其完整的含義，所以（如果翻譯）大悲（的名稱）就不對了，（如果）《涅槃經》來到這個世界也就變得沒有意義了。

二、就今昔相決難。現在和過去都是涅槃，應該都可以翻譯。然而現在不可以翻譯，才可以稱之為涅槃；過去可以翻譯，過去應該不是涅槃。過去不具備完整的涅槃，現在具備完整的（涅槃）所以不可以翻譯；過去不具備完整的（涅槃）所以可以翻譯，那麼就難以說明現在具備完整的（涅槃）才可以稱之為涅槃，過去不具備完整的（涅槃）應該不是涅槃。

三、約摩訶（偉大的）難涅槃（寂滅）。涅槃是摩訶涅槃，涅槃既然不可以翻譯，摩訶是涅槃，摩訶涅槃也不可以翻譯。而且，摩訶包含三種含義，翻譯摩訶就等於涅槃包含三種德行，也可以解釋為翻譯涅槃。如果說摩訶不是完整的名稱，涅槃是完整的名稱，那麼這個摩訶就不是涅槃的摩訶，涅槃也不是摩訶涅槃了。涅槃包含三種德行，名稱既然是完整的；摩訶包含三種含義，摩訶也是完整的名稱。都不可以翻譯，或者說都可以翻譯。

四、難涅槃（寂滅）不可翻譯，那麼《涅槃經》的全部內容都會被破壞。《涅槃經》一開始，清晨就宣告般涅槃（入滅），所有大眾都感到悲傷。純陀（人名）說：『雖然知道如來方便涅槃（示現入滅），但是我們還是不能不感到悲傷。』既然是眾多的德行，大眾和純陀為什麼會感到悲傷？而且《現病品》中說：『（如來）靠在鶴樹之間休息，下愚的凡夫看見了還說必定是涅槃（入滅）。』如果是眾多的德行，下愚的人怎麼能夠看得見？如果看見了眾多的德行，那就是上等的智慧，為什麼還叫下愚？所以（涅槃）不可以（翻譯）。

五、總別難。那個世界有完整和片面的名稱，那個世界有總稱和別稱；我們這裡只有片面的名稱沒有完整的名稱，我們這裡只有別稱沒有總稱。這裡和那裡都有總稱和別稱，彼此都有完整和片面的名稱。

【English Translation】 English version I. The Difficulty of Unequal Great Compassion. That country has a general name, but this place does not have a complete designation. The Tathagata (如來) only considers that the sentient beings of that land do not accept this world's (designation). Now, retaining the complete name of that world is to understand its meaning, but without a complete name here, we cannot understand its complete meaning. Therefore, (if we translate) 'Great Compassion' (大悲), it would be incorrect. (If) the Nirvana Sutra (涅槃經) comes to this world, it would become meaningless.

II. The Difficulty of Resolving the Past and Present. Both the present and the past are Nirvana (涅槃), so they should both be translatable. However, the present cannot be translated, so it can be called Nirvana; the past can be translated, so the past should not be Nirvana. The past does not have complete Nirvana, but the present has complete (Nirvana), so it cannot be translated. The past does not have complete (Nirvana), so it can be translated. Then it is difficult to explain that the present has complete (Nirvana) so it can be called Nirvana; the past does not have complete (Nirvana), so it should not be Nirvana.

III. The Difficulty Concerning Mahā (摩訶) and Nirvana (涅槃). Nirvana is Mahā-Nirvana (摩訶涅槃). Since Nirvana cannot be translated, and Mahā is Nirvana, Mahā-Nirvana also cannot be translated. Moreover, Mahā contains three meanings. Translating Mahā is equivalent to Nirvana containing three virtues, which can also be interpreted as translating Nirvana. If it is said that Mahā is not a complete name and Nirvana is a complete name, then this Mahā is not the Mahā of Nirvana, and Nirvana is not Mahā-Nirvana. Nirvana contains three virtues, so the name is complete; Mahā contains three meanings, so Mahā is also a complete name. Neither can be translated, or both can be translated.

IV. The Difficulty That If Nirvana (涅槃) Cannot Be Translated, Then the Entire Nirvana Sutra (涅槃經) Will Be Destroyed. At the beginning of the Nirvana Sutra, in the early morning, the Parinirvana (般涅槃) is announced, and all the assembly feels sorrow. Cunda (純陀) said, 'Although we know that the Tathagata (如來) conveniently shows Nirvana (示現入滅), we cannot help but feel sorrow.' Since it is a multitude of virtues, why would the assembly and Cunda feel sorrow? Moreover, in the Chapter on Manifesting Illness (現病品), it says, '(The Tathagata) rests between the crane trees, and even the foolish common people see it and say it must be Nirvana (入滅).' If it is a multitude of virtues, how could the foolish see it? If they see a multitude of virtues, that is superior wisdom, so why are they called foolish? Therefore, (Nirvana) cannot (be translated).

V. The Difficulty of General and Specific. That world has complete and partial names, that world has general and specific terms; this place only has partial names and no complete names, this place only has specific terms and no general terms. Both here and there have general and specific names, and both have complete and partial names.

---

次出有翻六師，翻者無量，略明六師。

第一、道生法師翻為滅，其義訓乃自多方，正名為滅，經論皆爾也。

第二、肇師翻之以「滅度」，秦言「無為」，亦言「滅度」。以虛無寂漠，妙絕有為，名曰無為；以其大患永滅，超度四流，故云滅度。

他家不同，滅則語法，度則目人。法本有今無，人從此到彼。又云：實人實法皆滅，假名人法悉度也。又，滅者凡聖皆滅，度則簡異凡夫，凡夫滅已後生不得稱度，大聖一滅永不復生，故稱之曰度。

第三、太原宗師翻解脫。彼云：涅槃者，累盡之通名，萬善之號。涅槃是天竺之音，此正言解脫，如經說也。乃至開善等，翻為無累也。

第四、宣武竉師翻為大寂定。經云：涅槃名大寂定也。

第五、仙師翻不生。梁武用對煩惱不名涅槃，煩惱不生乃名涅槃也。

第六、影師翻安樂。不安則名生死，安樂則是涅槃。北人云：般涅槃那翻入息。入有三種：一實論，謂息妄歸真，從因趣果，故名入；二者真應相對，息化歸真名入；三但就應為言，謂舍有為入無為，名入也。

涅槃正翻為滅，若隨義翻不生解脫等。

問：若正翻滅，何故下文云滅諸結火名滅度，離覺觀故名涅槃？

外國滅名不同，諸結火滅名「彌

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 接下來要講的是六師（外道教師），「翻」的含義有很多，這裡簡要說明六師的「翻」。 第一、道生法師將Nirvana（涅槃）翻譯為「滅」，其含義訓釋有很多方面，但正名就叫「滅」，經典和論著都是這樣。 第二、肇法師將Nirvana翻譯為「滅度」，在秦語中是「無為」的意思，也可以說是「滅度」。因為虛無寂靜，超越一切有為法，所以叫做「無為」；因為一切大患永遠滅除，超脫四種流轉（四流：欲流、有流、見流、無明流），所以叫做「滅度」。 其他人的理解不同，「滅」是針對法的，「度」是針對人的。法本來有現在沒有了，人從這裡到達彼岸。又說：真實的人和真實的法都滅了，虛假的人和法才被度脫。還有，「滅」是凡夫和聖人都滅，「度」則區分凡夫，凡夫滅后還會再生，不能稱為「度」，大聖一旦滅度就永遠不再生，所以稱之為「度」。 第三、太原的宗師將Nirvana翻譯為「解脫」。他們說：Nirvana是所有煩惱都斷盡的通稱，是萬善的稱號。Nirvana是天竺語的音譯，正確的翻譯是「解脫」，就像經典里說的那樣。甚至開善等人，將Nirvana翻譯為「無累」。 第四、宣武竉師將Nirvana翻譯為「大寂定」。經典上說：Nirvana叫做大寂定。 第五、仙師將Nirvana翻譯為「不生」。梁武帝認為，對治煩惱不能叫做Nirvana，煩惱不再生起才叫做Nirvana。 第六、影師將Nirvana翻譯為「安樂」。不安樂就叫做生死，安樂就是Nirvana。北方人說：般涅槃那（Parinirvana）翻譯為「入息」。「入」有三種含義：一是實論，指止息妄念迴歸真如，從因走向果，所以叫做「入」；二是真應相對，止息應化身迴歸真身叫做「入」；三是隻就應化身來說，指捨棄有為進入無為，叫做「入」。 Nirvana正確的翻譯是「滅」，如果根據含義來翻譯，可以是不生、解脫等等。 問：如果正確的翻譯是「滅」，為什麼下文說滅除各種煩惱之火叫做滅度，遠離覺和觀叫做Nirvana？ 外國對於「滅」的稱呼不同，各種煩惱之火的熄滅叫做「彌（Mi）」

【English Translation】 English version: Next, we will discuss the six teachers (heretical teachers). The meaning of 'translation' (of Nirvana) is vast, and here we will briefly explain the 'translation' of the six teachers. First, Dharma Master Daosheng translates Nirvana as 'extinction' (滅, mie). The interpretation of its meaning is multifaceted, but its proper name is 'extinction,' as it is in both scriptures and treatises. Second, Master Zhao translates it as 'extinction-deliverance' (滅度, miedu). In the Qin language, it means 'non-action' (無為, wuwei), and it can also be said to be 'extinction-deliverance.' Because it is empty and still, surpassing all conditioned phenomena, it is called 'non-action.' Because all great afflictions are permanently extinguished, and it transcends the four streams (of existence) (four streams: desire, existence, views, and ignorance), it is called 'extinction-deliverance.' Others have different understandings. 'Extinction' is directed at the Dharma (法, dharma), while 'deliverance' is directed at the person. The Dharma originally existed but now does not, and the person goes from here to the other shore. It is also said that the real person and the real Dharma are both extinguished, and only the false person and Dharma are delivered. Furthermore, 'extinction' applies to both ordinary beings and sages, while 'deliverance' distinguishes ordinary beings. Ordinary beings are reborn after extinction and cannot be called 'delivered.' Great sages, once extinguished, are never reborn, so it is called 'deliverance.' Third, the master of Taiyuan translates Nirvana as 'liberation' (解脫, jietuo). They say that Nirvana is the general term for the complete exhaustion of all afflictions and the title of all virtues. Nirvana is a transliteration from Sanskrit, and the correct translation is 'liberation,' as the scriptures say. Even Kaishen and others translate Nirvana as 'without accumulation (of karma)' (無累, wulei). Fourth, Master Chong of Xuanwu translates Nirvana as 'great quiescence-samadhi' (大寂定, da jiding). The scriptures say that Nirvana is called great quiescence-samadhi. Fifth, the Immortal Master translates Nirvana as 'non-birth' (不生, busheng). Emperor Wu of Liang believed that counteracting afflictions cannot be called Nirvana; only when afflictions no longer arise is it called Nirvana. Sixth, the Shadow Master translates Nirvana as 'peace and happiness' (安樂, anle). Non-peace and happiness is called birth and death, while peace and happiness is Nirvana. People in the north say that Parinirvana (般涅槃那) is translated as 'entering breath.' 'Entering' has three meanings: first, in terms of reality, it refers to stopping deluded thoughts and returning to true suchness, going from cause to effect, so it is called 'entering'; second, in relation to true and responsive bodies, stopping the manifested body and returning to the true body is called 'entering'; third, only in terms of the manifested body, it refers to abandoning conditioned phenomena and entering unconditioned phenomena, which is called 'entering.' The correct translation of Nirvana is 'extinction.' If translated according to its meaning, it can be non-birth, liberation, and so on. Question: If the correct translation is 'extinction,' why does the following text say that extinguishing the fires of various afflictions is called extinction-deliverance, and being apart from perception and observation is called Nirvana? Foreign countries have different names for 'extinction.' The extinguishing of the fires of various afflictions is called 'Mi (彌)'.

---

留陀」；離覺觀名「涅槃那也」，言息，究竟解脫永蘇息。

息有三：一息因果患。二息諸事業。諸事業者，文云：「雖得禪定、智慧、解脫，不名畢竟，若能斷除三十七品所行之事，乃名畢竟涅槃也」。前諸師定言不可翻，具如前難。今復定言可翻，亦彼研核睿師《大品序》云：秦言謬者定之以字義，胡音失者正之以天竺，不可變者則而出，今既出以涅槃則是不可翻，云何言可翻耶？

今更別難為兩意：來生肇等翻為滅為一難，來宗師等翻解脫無累為一難。若言涅槃翻為解脫，棲神無累何事憂悲耶？又云滅諸結火名為滅度，離覺觀故名為涅槃。既涅槃滅度兩出別，知不以滅度翻涅槃，然生肇等師親承什師並共翻譯，豈當有謬而釋彈片耶？

今明不破生肇，今古人彈其定翻者耳，若定言翻滅度則過之甚也。

問：汝今云何作此問者且反彼？汝言涅槃為有名為無名而問翻無翻耶，而未知有名無名而更問翻無翻，如未知兔頭有角無角而問菟角若為長短耶？

翻無翻亦爾，無名是本，翻無翻是末也。然此義有齊不齊，定其齊者，涅槃未曾名未曾無名，未曾翻未曾無翻。則非名非無名，非翻非無翻。故經云：「大涅槃者不可得聞。何以故？非有為故，非無為故，非音聲故，不可說故」，故知非

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：『留陀』（Rudha）：是離棄覺和觀的狀態，被稱為『涅槃那也』（Nirvana），意味著止息，最終的解脫和永久的安寧。

止息有三種：一是止息因果的禍患；二是止息各種事業。所謂各種事業，經文中說：『即使獲得了禪定、智慧、解脫，也不能稱為究竟，如果能夠斷除三十七道品所行之事，才能稱為究竟涅槃』。之前的法師們斷言不可翻譯，理由如前所述。現在又斷言可以翻譯，也如睿智的法師在《大品般若經序》中所說：對於秦地的翻譯錯誤，用字義來確定；對於胡地的發音缺失，用天竺的語言來糾正；不可改變的就直接音譯。現在既然已經音譯為涅槃，那就是不可翻譯的，又怎麼說可以翻譯呢？

現在我再從兩個方面提出疑問：鳩摩羅什和僧肇等法師翻譯為『滅』是一個疑問，道生法師等翻譯為『解脫無累』是一個疑問。如果說涅槃翻譯為解脫，那麼棲息于神識，沒有牽累，又有什麼可憂愁悲傷的呢？又說滅除各種煩惱之火稱為『滅度』，遠離覺和觀的境界稱為『涅槃』。既然涅槃和滅度是兩個不同的詞，就知道不能用滅度來翻譯涅槃。而且僧肇等法師親自師從鳩摩羅什法師並一起翻譯經典，怎麼會有錯誤而遭到後人的批評呢？

現在我表明不是要否定僧肇法師的翻譯，只是今人和古人批評那些堅持一定要翻譯的人罷了，如果一定要翻譯成『滅度』，那就太過分了。

問：你現在這樣提問，不如反過來問你。你說涅槃是有名還是無名，然後才問可不可以翻譯呢？在不知道是有名還是無名的情況下就問可不可以翻譯，就像不知道兔子的頭上有角還是沒有角，就問兔子的角是長還是短一樣。

翻譯與不翻譯也是如此，無名是根本，翻譯與不翻譯是末節。然而這個道理有相同和不相同之處，如果確定其相同之處，涅槃未曾有名，也未曾無名，未曾翻譯，也未曾不翻譯。那麼就既非有名也非無名，既非翻譯也非不翻譯。所以經中說：『大涅槃是不可聽聞的。為什麼呢？因為它既非有為法，也非無為法，也非音聲，所以不可說』，因此可知並非……

【English Translation】 English version: 『Rudha』 (留陀): is the state of being apart from perception and observation, called 『Nirvana』 (涅槃那也), meaning cessation, ultimate liberation, and eternal peace.

There are three kinds of cessation: first, cessation of the suffering of cause and effect; second, cessation of all activities. As for all activities, the scripture says: 『Even if one obtains meditation, wisdom, and liberation, it cannot be called ultimate. Only if one can eliminate the practices of the thirty-seven factors of enlightenment can it be called ultimate Nirvana.』 Previous masters asserted that it could not be translated, for reasons stated earlier. Now it is asserted that it can be translated, as the wise master said in the 『Preface to the Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra』: For errors in Qin translations, use the meaning of the words to determine; for omissions in Hu pronunciations, use the language of India to correct; what cannot be changed is transliterated. Now that it has been transliterated as Nirvana, it is untranslatable, so how can it be said that it can be translated?

Now I raise two more questions: Kumarajiva and Sengzhao (僧肇) and others translating it as 『extinction』 is one question, Daosheng (道生) and others translating it as 『liberation without burden』 is another question. If Nirvana is translated as liberation, then dwelling in consciousness without burden, what is there to worry about and grieve over? It is also said that extinguishing the fire of all afflictions is called 『extinction,』 and being apart from perception and observation is called 『Nirvana.』 Since Nirvana and extinction are two different terms, it is known that Nirvana cannot be translated as extinction. Moreover, Master Sengzhao and others personally studied under Master Kumarajiva and translated the scriptures together, how could there be errors that would be criticized by later generations?

Now I clarify that I am not negating the translation of Sengzhao, but only that people of today and the past are criticizing those who insist on translating it. If it must be translated as 『extinction,』 then that is going too far.

Question: The way you ask this question, why not ask you in return? Do you say that Nirvana is named or unnamed, and then ask whether it can be translated or not? Asking whether it can be translated or not without knowing whether it is named or unnamed is like asking whether a rabbit's horns are long or short without knowing whether a rabbit has horns or not.

Translation and non-translation are also like this, the unnamed is the root, and translation and non-translation are the branches. However, this principle has similarities and differences. If we determine its similarities, Nirvana has never been named, nor has it ever been unnamed, never translated, nor has it ever been untranslated. Then it is neither named nor unnamed, neither translated nor untranslated. Therefore, the sutra says: 『Great Nirvana is not to be heard. Why? Because it is neither conditioned nor unconditioned, nor is it sound, so it cannot be spoken,』 therefore it is known that it is not...

---

名；亦可得聞，以聞故，故知非無名。所以涅槃非名，所以涅槃非無名，強立名。非但強立名，亦強言無名。則非名非無名，施名施無名；亦非翻非無翻，強翻強無翻也。

言不齊者，明涅槃非名無名強為涅槃立名，就強名中論翻不翻。何者？涅槃別總故翻而無翻，涅槃總別故無翻而翻。不翻而翻亦名為滅度，亦名無累解脫等；翻而不翻，則三德圓滿無所不含。豈可以一義翻耶？故涅槃具總別義，故具有翻不翻也。

又就今昔論總別，有四句義：自有總是別非，合曰三德涅槃也；自有別是而總非，如昔日涅槃唯是斷無為涅槃也；總別俱是者，昔別是今總是；俱非者，昔總非今別非也。

次明今□涅槃。目論總別是非四句義，何者為其相？一往就因緣為論，明總是別非，是是非也。言總則得別，道是則得非。若言總不得別，則別非總。別道是不得非，此是非非。今總是別總，總是別，則是即也。今別是總別，別非總，即非也。若論以意者，此言已是，而人心有得不能云悟。障教之徒好依字，今復須示其文處。

總是別非者，如《哀嘆品》三德縱橫，皆非三德圓，其乃是也。

別是總非者，如下文：佛名覺，涅槃名解脫。又涅槃名果，果取斷不取智也。

次總別無定，一切皆總皆別

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 名：也可以聽聞，因為聽聞的緣故，所以知道並非沒有名稱。因此，涅槃並非名稱，因此，涅槃並非沒有名稱，只是勉強安立一個名稱。不僅僅是勉強安立一個名稱，也是勉強說它是沒有名稱。那麼，就既非名稱也非沒有名稱，既施加名稱也施加沒有名稱；也既非翻譯也非沒有翻譯，既勉強翻譯也勉強說沒有翻譯。

言語不一致，是說明涅槃既非名稱也非沒有名稱，只是勉強為涅槃安立一個名稱，就在這勉強的名稱中討論翻譯與不翻譯。為什麼呢？涅槃因為有總相和別相的區分，所以翻譯與不翻譯並存，涅槃因為有總相和別相的統一，所以不翻譯與翻譯並存。不翻譯而翻譯也可以稱為滅度，也可以稱為無累解脫等等；翻譯而不翻譯，那麼三德就圓滿無缺，無所不包。怎麼可以用一種意義來翻譯呢？所以涅槃具有總相和別相的意義，所以具有翻譯與不翻譯的特性。

又從今昔的角度來討論總相和別相，有四句意義：自有總相，是別相所非的，合起來就稱為三德涅槃；自有別相，是總相所非的，比如過去所說的涅槃只是斷滅的無為涅槃；總相和別相都是的，過去是別相，現在是總相；總相和別相都不是的，過去總相不是，現在別相也不是。

接下來闡明現在的涅槃。用總相、別相、是、非這四句來討論意義，什麼是它的相狀呢？從因緣的角度來討論，闡明總相是別相所非的，是就是非。說總相就包含了別相，說道理就包含了非理。如果說總相不包含別相，那麼別相就不是總相。說別相是就不能說非理，這就是非理的非理。現在總相是別相的總相，總相是別相，這就是即。現在別相是總相的別相，別相不是總相，這就是即非。如果從意念的角度來討論，這些話已經很明白了，但是人心有所得卻不能說是領悟。那些執著于文字的人喜歡依賴字面，現在還需要指出這些經文的出處。

總相是別相所非的，比如《哀嘆品》中三德縱橫交錯，都不是三德圓滿，這才是真正的三德。

別相是總相所非的，如下文：佛名為覺（Buddha is called Awakening），涅槃名為解脫（Nirvana is called Liberation）。又涅槃名為果（Nirvana is called Fruit），果取斷滅而不取智慧。

其次，總相和別相沒有定性，一切都是總相，一切都是別相。

【English Translation】 English version: Name: It can also be heard, and because of hearing, it is known that it is not without a name. Therefore, Nirvana is not a name, and therefore, Nirvana is not without a name; it is just a forced establishment of a name. It is not only a forced establishment of a name, but also a forced saying that it is without a name. Then, it is neither a name nor without a name, both applying a name and applying no name; it is also neither translating nor not translating, both forcing a translation and forcing no translation.

The inconsistency of words clarifies that Nirvana is neither a name nor without a name, but a name is forcibly established for Nirvana. The discussion of translation and non-translation is within this forced name. Why? Because Nirvana has distinctions between general and specific aspects, translation and non-translation coexist. Because Nirvana has a unity of general and specific aspects, non-translation and translation coexist. Non-translation that is translation can also be called extinction, and can also be called unburdened liberation, etc.; translation that is not translation means that the three virtues are complete and all-encompassing. How can it be translated with one meaning? Therefore, Nirvana has both general and specific meanings, and therefore has the characteristics of both translation and non-translation.

Furthermore, discussing generality and specificity from the perspective of past and present, there are four sentences of meaning: There is a generality that is negated by specificity, which together is called the Three Virtues Nirvana (Trideva Nirvana); there is a specificity that is negated by generality, such as the Nirvana of the past, which was only the cessation of inactive Nirvana; generality and specificity are both true, the past is specificity, and the present is generality; generality and specificity are both false, the past generality is not true, and the present specificity is also not true.

Next, clarify the present Nirvana. Use the four sentences of generality, specificity, is, and is not to discuss the meaning. What is its characteristic? Discussing from the perspective of causes and conditions, clarify that generality is negated by specificity, is is not. Saying generality includes specificity, saying reason includes unreason. If it is said that generality does not include specificity, then specificity is not generality. Saying specificity is cannot say unreason, this is the unreason of unreason. Now generality is the generality of specificity, generality is specificity, this is 'is'. Now specificity is the specificity of generality, specificity is not generality, this is 'is not'. If discussing from the perspective of intention, these words are already clear, but the human heart has gained something but cannot say it is enlightenment. Those who cling to words like to rely on the literal meaning, and now it is necessary to point out the source of these scriptures.

Generality is negated by specificity, such as the Three Virtues in the 'Lamentation Chapter' (Aitana Chapter), which are intertwined and are not the completeness of the Three Virtues; this is the true Three Virtues.

Specificity is negated by generality, as in the following text: Buddha is called Awakening (Buddha is called Awakening), Nirvana is called Liberation (Nirvana is called Liberation). Also, Nirvana is called Fruit (Nirvana is called Fruit), the fruit takes cessation and does not take wisdom.

Secondly, generality and specificity are not fixed, everything is generality, and everything is specificity.

---

。若當涅槃總三德別，有時三德總涅槃別，一切皆是般若，皆是解脫，有涅槃成秘藏。如《四相品》說，涅槃為別也。《大品》云攝一切善法入般若，是般若為總也。然今因涅槃總別，則議涅槃別總必具此二義，若偏取一義，則未識涅槃通意也。

第三明絕名。

古來明真諦與涅槃絕不絕，凡有三說不同。

一云、二皆不絕。真諦有真如實際之名，涅槃有常樂我凈之稱；而言絕者，乃絕生死世俗患累之名，若見美妙之名則不絕。

第二、明二種皆絕。真如本自寂絕布微，非名所及，涅槃亦爾，言語道斷心行處滅也。

第三師云：真諦絕、涅槃不絕。是俗諦乃有，則真義尚論。涅槃終是俗諦，是續待二假。莊嚴明涅槃二諦攝，開善明是俗諦攝，故不絕。

今次第難之。

難第一家：真諦涅槃皆不絕則違經文。經云：「涅槃非名，強為之名」。又云：「非名非相，非待非不待」。云何言不絕耶？若言涅槃無生死之名為絕者，亦應生死無涅槃名，生死亦絕。若互無，為互絕者；亦應互無，應互妙。不可互妙耶！互絕耶！又肇師依《涅槃論》明涅槃無名，云何涅槃不絕？斯則乖關河舊說，復違涅槃正文也。

難第二解：明涅槃斷言語、絕心行、無名無相，所以是絕者，亦不

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：如果說涅槃總括了法身、般若、解脫這三種功德，而有時這三種功德又各自獨立於涅槃之外，那麼一切都是般若，一切都是解脫，涅槃成就了秘藏。正如《四相品》所說，涅槃是獨立的。而《大品般若經》說攝取一切善法歸於般若，這是般若作為總體的含義。然而，現在因為涅槃的總體和獨立性，討論涅槃的獨立性和總體性必然包含這兩種含義，如果只偏重於一種含義，那就是沒有理解涅槃的通達之意。 第三，闡明絕名。 古來對於真諦（Paramārtha-satya，勝義諦）與涅槃（Nirvana，滅）是否絕名，有三種不同的說法。 第一種觀點認為，兩者都不絕名。真諦有真如（Tathātā，如如）實際之名，涅槃有常樂我凈（Nitya-sukha-ātma-śubha，常、樂、我、凈）之稱；而說『絕』，是斷絕生死世俗的患累之名，如果見到美妙之名，則不絕。 第二種觀點認為，兩種都絕名。真如本來就寂靜絕妙，不是名相所能觸及的，涅槃也是如此，言語之道斷絕，心行之處滅盡。 第三種觀點認為：真諦絕名，涅槃不絕名。因為俗諦（Saṃvṛti-satya，世俗諦）才有名相，所以真諦尚可討論。涅槃終究是俗諦，是需要依賴二假的。莊嚴法師認為涅槃包含在二諦之中，開善法師認為涅槃包含在俗諦之中，所以不絕名。 現在依次駁斥這些觀點。 駁斥第一種觀點：真諦和涅槃都不絕名，這違反了經文。經文說：『涅槃不是名，勉強為它取名』。又說：『非名非相，非待非不待』。怎麼能說不絕名呢？如果說涅槃沒有生死的名稱所以是『絕』，那麼也應該說生死沒有涅槃的名稱，生死也『絕』。如果互相沒有對方的名稱，所以是互相『絕』；那麼也應該互相沒有對方的妙處。難道不能互相沒有妙處嗎！難道不能互相斷絕嗎！而且肇法師依據《涅槃論》闡明涅槃沒有名稱，怎麼能說涅槃不絕名？這既違背了關河一帶的舊說，又違背了《涅槃經》的正文。 駁斥第二種解釋：認為涅槃斷絕言語、滅絕心行、沒有名相，所以是『絕』，這也是不對的。

【English Translation】 English version: If it is said that Nirvana (Nirvana, extinction) encompasses the three virtues of Dharmakaya (Dharmakāya, Dharma body), Prajna (Prajñā, wisdom), and Liberation, and sometimes these three virtues are separate from Nirvana, then everything is Prajna, everything is Liberation, and Nirvana becomes a secret treasure. As stated in the 'Four Aspects Chapter', Nirvana is separate. The 'Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra' says that all good dharmas are gathered into Prajna, which is the meaning of Prajna as a whole. However, now because of the totality and independence of Nirvana, discussing the independence and totality of Nirvana must include these two meanings. If one only focuses on one meaning, then one has not understood the comprehensive meaning of Nirvana. Third, clarifying the cessation of names. Since ancient times, there have been three different views on whether the True Reality (Paramārtha-satya, ultimate truth) and Nirvana (Nirvana, extinction) are without names. The first view is that neither ceases to have names. The True Reality has the name of Suchness (Tathātā, thusness) and actuality, and Nirvana has the title of Eternity, Bliss, Self, and Purity (Nitya-sukha-ātma-śubha, eternal, joyful, self, and pure); and to say 'cessation' is to cut off the names of suffering and burdens of samsara, but if one sees beautiful names, then it does not cease. The second view is that both cease to have names. Suchness is originally tranquil and subtle, beyond the reach of names, and so is Nirvana, where the path of language is cut off and the realm of mental activity is extinguished. The third view is that the True Reality ceases to have names, but Nirvana does not. Because names exist only in conventional truth (Saṃvṛti-satya, conventional truth), the ultimate meaning can still be discussed. Nirvana is ultimately conventional truth, which relies on two provisionalities. Dharma Master Zhuangyan believes that Nirvana is included in the two truths, and Dharma Master Kaishan believes that Nirvana is included in conventional truth, so it does not cease to have names. Now, I will refute these views in order. Refuting the first view: that neither the True Reality nor Nirvana ceases to have names, which violates the sutras. The sutras say: 'Nirvana is not a name, but a name is given to it reluctantly.' It also says: 'Neither name nor form, neither dependent nor independent.' How can it be said that it does not cease to have names? If it is said that Nirvana does not have the name of samsara, so it is 'cessation', then it should also be said that samsara does not have the name of Nirvana, and samsara also 'ceases'. If they do not have each other's names, so they 'cease' from each other; then they should also not have each other's wonders. Can they not lack each other's wonders! Can they not cease from each other! Moreover, Dharma Master Zhao explains according to the 'Nirvana Treatise' that Nirvana has no name, how can it be said that Nirvana does not cease to have names? This violates both the old sayings of the Guanhe region and the correct text of the 'Nirvana Sutra'. Refuting the second explanation: that Nirvana cuts off language, extinguishes mental activity, and has no name or form, so it is 'cessation', which is also incorrect.

---

然。若涅槃絕同真諦絕者，亦應涅槃同真諦頑。涅槃不可同真諦頑者，則涅槃不可同真諦絕。

第三師云：真諦絕、涅槃不絕者，亦不然。若真諦絕涅槃不絕者，真諦妙涅槃不妙，真諦空涅槃不空，二種皆空則二皆絕也。彼云真諦妙無，涅槃妙有，二種有無，雖異而是妙，既皆妙則應皆絕，一絕一不絕則一妙一不妙也。

問：今意云何耶？

解云：若更有解還同足載耳！只除前來諸解注意自現，何煩別說耶！而今為障學者未能體道，今因指識月，藉教知理，而心無所存。又云：無離文字說解脫相。又經云：乃知解脫無言，未知言則解脫。

二云乃知涅槃無名，未知名則涅槃也。又此經下文云：「如來涅槃非有為、非無為、非名、不名、非待不待。」則是非絕非不絕，何得而絕不絕耶？又涅槃之體有是不是，有非不非，是是不能是，非是亦不是，非非不能非，是非亦不非，故非是非非，能是能非，非絕非不絕，能絕能不絕也。

有人言：三論所釋但得真諦一支義，我真諦離四句絕百非。今明不爾，經既云非物非不物，則非真非不真，非俗非不俗，何關真諦？

問：涅槃既非名非不名，是何物而能名能無名耶？

解云：涅槃非物非不物相得，更問道何物耶？無物而物而物所謂

正道。故肇師云：「涅槃者，名為道也。涅槃無名，強為立名，名為涅槃。」但下文明名有二種：一因緣名，二無因緣名。因緣名如舍利弗也；無因緣者如坻羅婆夷，實不食油強名食油。涅槃亦爾，無有因緣強名涅槃也。

問：強為涅槃立名為對生死不對生死？

解云：涅槃豈不對生死？故肇師云：出處異號應物假名也。

難云：若爾，則是因緣名，何謂無因緣名？

解云：涅槃未曾名無名，未曾對不對。道因緣亦是強言因緣，一切強立名也。

次舉五類一況釋涅槃。

五類者：一法界、二法性、三法身、四般若、五佛性；一況即是虛空，虛空具教不絕義及總別義。

言法界者，如《華嚴》云：佛子法界者，界非故則不絕，絕名無名義而名法界。則絕不絕義，無名名義。

法性者，正法性遠離一切語言道，一切趣非趣，悉寂滅相，則不絕絕義，名無名而名為法性，則絕不絕，無名名義也。

法身如《金剛身品》。

般若如「嘆般若偈」。念相觀已除，語言亦滅也。

佛性者，如《師子吼》明佛性第一義空。所言空者，不見空與之不空也。

舉虛空況者，如《六種品》云，是故知虛空非有亦非無，非相非可相也。

次明人法義。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 正道。所以肇法師說：『涅槃（Nirvana，佛教術語，指解脫生死的狀態），名為道。涅槃沒有固定的名稱，勉強為它設立一個名稱，就叫做涅槃。』但下文所說的『名』有兩種：一是因緣名，二是無因緣名。因緣名就像舍利弗（Sariputra，佛陀的十大弟子之一）的名字一樣；無因緣名就像坻羅婆夷（名稱來源不詳），實際上不吃油卻強行稱作『食油』。涅槃也是這樣，沒有實在的因緣，勉強稱作涅槃。

問：勉強為涅槃設立名稱，是針對生死而立，還是不針對生死而立？

答：涅槃怎麼會不針對生死呢？所以肇法師說：『隨著所處的不同而有不同的名稱，爲了適應事物而假立名稱。』

問：如果這樣，那就是因緣名了，為什麼說是無因緣名呢？

答：涅槃未曾被命名為『無名』，也未曾針對『對』或『不對』。說道因緣，也只是勉強說是因緣，一切都是勉強設立的名稱。

接下來舉出五類事物來比況解釋涅槃。

五類事物是：一、法界（Dharmadhatu，宇宙萬法的總稱）；二、法性（Dharmata，諸法的真實體性）；三、法身（Dharmakaya，佛的真身）；四、般若（Prajna，智慧）；五、佛性（Buddha-nature，一切眾生皆具的成佛的可能性）。用『一』來比況，就是虛空，虛空具有教義不間斷的意義以及總別義。

說到法界，如《華嚴經》所說：『佛子，法界，界不是固定的，所以不會斷絕，斷絕就成了無名，而名為法界。』這就包含了斷絕與不絕的意義，無名與命名的意義。

法性，真正的法性遠離一切語言之道，一切趨向和不趨向，都處於寂滅的狀態，這就包含了不絕與斷絕的意義，無名而名為法性，這就包含了斷絕與不絕，無名與命名的意義。

法身，如《金剛身品》所說。

般若，如『嘆般若偈』所說。念頭的相狀和觀察都已經消除，語言也寂滅了。

佛性，如《師子吼經》所闡明的佛性第一義空。所說的『空』，是看不到空與不空的對立。

用虛空來比況，如《六種品》所說，因此可知虛空非有也非無，非相也非可相。

接下來闡明人法義。

【English Translation】 English version The Right Path. Therefore, Master Zhao said: 'Nirvana (Nirvana, a Buddhist term referring to the state of liberation from birth and death) is called the Path. Nirvana has no fixed name, so a name is forcibly established for it, and it is called Nirvana.' But the 'name' mentioned below has two types: one is the name of cause and condition, and the other is the name without cause and condition. The name of cause and condition is like Sariputra (Sariputra, one of the ten great disciples of the Buddha); the name without cause and condition is like 坻羅婆夷 (source of the name unknown), who actually does not eat oil but is forcibly called 'oil-eater'. Nirvana is also like this, without real cause and condition, it is forcibly called Nirvana.

Question: Is the forced establishment of a name for Nirvana directed at birth and death, or not directed at birth and death?

Answer: How can Nirvana not be directed at birth and death? Therefore, Master Zhao said: 'Different names are given according to different places, and names are temporarily established to adapt to things.'

Question: If so, then it is a name of cause and condition, why is it called a name without cause and condition?

Answer: Nirvana has never been named 'no name', nor has it ever been directed at 'right' or 'wrong'. Speaking of cause and condition, it is only forced to say cause and condition, everything is a forcedly established name.

Next, five categories of things are cited to compare and explain Nirvana.

The five categories are: 1. Dharmadhatu (Dharmadhatu, the totality of all phenomena in the universe); 2. Dharmata (Dharmata, the true nature of all dharmas); 3. Dharmakaya (Dharmakaya, the true body of the Buddha); 4. Prajna (Prajna, wisdom); 5. Buddha-nature (Buddha-nature, the potential for all beings to become Buddhas). Using 'one' to compare, it is emptiness, emptiness has the meaning of uninterrupted teaching and the meaning of general and specific.

Speaking of Dharmadhatu, as the Avatamsaka Sutra says: 'Buddha-son, Dharmadhatu, the boundary is not fixed, so it will not be cut off, cut off becomes no name, and it is called Dharmadhatu.' This includes the meaning of cut off and not cut off, the meaning of no name and naming.

Dharmata, the true Dharmata is far away from all paths of language, all tendencies and non-tendencies are in a state of stillness and extinction, which includes the meaning of not cut off and cut off, no name is called Dharmata, which includes the meaning of cut off and not cut off, no name and naming.

Dharmakaya, as described in the 'Diamond Body Chapter'.

Prajna, as described in the 'Ode to Prajna'. The appearance of thoughts and observation have been eliminated, and language has also become silent.

Buddha-nature, as explained in the Lion's Roar Sutra, the first meaning of Buddha-nature is emptiness. The so-called 'emptiness' is that the opposition between emptiness and non-emptiness cannot be seen.

Using emptiness to compare, as the 'Six Kinds Chapter' says, therefore it can be known that emptiness is neither existent nor non-existent, neither appearance nor appreciable appearance.

Next, explain the meaning of person and dharma.

---

問：涅槃是人名，是法稱？為具足名，為不具名耶？

他云涅槃是法名，既稱云涅槃，涅槃是至極之名，窮原儘性之說，所以是具足也。今明涅槃非有為非無為，則非具足、非不具足、非人、非法，亦具足、亦不具足、亦人名、亦法稱。

何者？三點圓伊金剛寶瓶滿足無缺，故是具足；而涅槃是果，果斷德故，不具足。涅槃是法，不可解言人者；四德為涅槃，我則是人也。又，涅槃非但法，亦得是譬云：「如實、非有非無，王罪亦爾也」(是阇王作逆，佛慰喻之言是)。又，《中論》云：「無生亦無滅，寂滅如涅槃」也。舊云：「佛方廣華嚴具足人法涅槃」。但是法，非人者，明「法長人短」義（明釋迦出穢土，為破我人之病，故明「法長人短」；舍那出於凈土界，「人法俱長」）。

然釋迦人法具有四句：一、法長人短，二、人長法短，三、俱短，四、俱長。

釋迦為破我人病故，明無人我，而有法，故云無造、無受者，善惡之累不忘也。又法通生死涅槃故，法長人短者，生死無人，唯涅槃有人，生死無我，唯涅槃有我也。此則具破眾生斷、常二見。生死無人故不常，而有法故不斷。眾生若聞生死中有人，則起常見；破常見故，明生死一向無人。眾生若聞無法，則言無因果、罪福等，

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 問：涅槃（Nirvana，指解脫的境界）是人名，還是法稱？是具足名，還是不具名呢？

對方說涅槃是法名，既然稱為涅槃，涅槃是至極之名，窮究本源、徹儘性理的說法，所以是具足名。現在說明涅槃非有為法，也非無為法，那麼就非具足、非不具足、非人、非法，也可以說是亦具足、亦不具足、亦人名、亦法稱。

為什麼這樣說呢？三點圓伊（一種象徵圓滿的符號）金剛寶瓶滿足無缺，所以是具足；而涅槃是果，因為斷除了煩惱，所以不具足。涅槃是法，不可理解為人；四德（常、樂、我、凈）是涅槃，『我』則是人。而且，涅槃非但只是法，也可以用譬喻來說：『如實、非有非無，就像國王作惡一樣』（這是阿阇世王作逆時，佛陀安慰開導他的話）。而且，《中論》說：『無生亦無滅，寂滅如涅槃』。舊說：『佛方廣華嚴具足人法涅槃』。如果只是法，而非人，那是說明『法長人短』的道理（說明釋迦牟尼佛出於穢土，是爲了破除我人執著的病，所以說明『法長人短』；毗盧遮那佛出於凈土界，是『人法俱長』）。

然而釋迦牟尼佛的人法具有四句：一、法長人短，二、人長法短，三、俱短，四、俱長。

釋迦牟尼佛爲了破除我人執著的病，所以說明無人我，而有法，所以說無造作者、無受報者，善惡的業力不會消失。而且法貫通生死涅槃，所以法長人短，生死中無人，只有涅槃中有人，生死中無我，只有涅槃中有我。這就能破除眾生的斷見和常見。生死中無人，所以不是常；而有法，所以不是斷。眾生如果聽說生死中有人，就會生起常見；爲了破除常見，所以說明生死一向無人。眾生如果聽說無法，就會說沒有因果、罪福等。

【English Translation】 English version Question: Is Nirvana (the state of liberation) a personal name or a dharma designation? Is it a complete name or an incomplete name?

The other party says that Nirvana is a dharma name. Since it is called Nirvana, Nirvana is the name of the ultimate, a saying that explores the origin and exhausts the nature, so it is a complete name. Now it is clarified that Nirvana is neither conditioned nor unconditioned, so it is neither complete nor incomplete, neither a person nor a dharma. It can also be said that it is both complete and incomplete, both a personal name and a dharma designation.

Why is this so? The three-pointed round I (a symbol of completeness) Vajra Treasure Vase is complete and without lack, so it is complete. But Nirvana is the result, because it has cut off afflictions, so it is incomplete. Nirvana is a dharma, and cannot be understood as a person. The four virtues (permanence, bliss, self, purity) are Nirvana, and 'self' is a person. Moreover, Nirvana is not only a dharma, but can also be used as a metaphor: 'As it is, neither existent nor non-existent, just like a king committing evil' (These are the words of the Buddha comforting and enlightening King Ajatasatru when he committed rebellion). Moreover, the Madhyamaka-karika says: 'No birth and no death, quiescence is like Nirvana.' The old saying: 'The Buddha's Avatamsaka is complete with person, dharma, and Nirvana.' If it is only dharma and not a person, it is to explain the principle of 'dharma is long and person is short' (explaining that Shakyamuni Buddha came from the impure land to break the disease of attachment to self and others, so it explains 'dharma is long and person is short'; Vairochana Buddha came from the pure land, which is 'person and dharma are both long').

However, Shakyamuni Buddha's person and dharma have four sentences: 1. Dharma is long and person is short, 2. Person is long and dharma is short, 3. Both are short, 4. Both are long.

Shakyamuni Buddha, in order to break the disease of attachment to self and others, explained that there is no person or self, but there is dharma, so it is said that there is no creator or receiver, and the karma of good and evil will not disappear. Moreover, the dharma penetrates birth and death Nirvana, so the dharma is long and the person is short. There is no person in birth and death, only in Nirvana there is a person. There is no self in birth and death, only in Nirvana there is a self. This can break the annihilationist and eternalist views of sentient beings. There is no person in birth and death, so it is not permanent; but there is dharma, so it is not annihilation. If sentient beings hear that there is a person in birth and death, they will give rise to the eternalist view. In order to break the eternalist view, it is explained that there is always no person in birth and death. If sentient beings hear that there is no dharma, they will say that there is no cause and effect, sin and merit, etc.

---

則起斷見；為破此見，故云有法。雖無有人，善惡之法不失，故明人短法長也。

法短人長者，此少難見，且一往明三我人，同斷結惑，同入灰斷，未辨法有終極。今曰涅槃及前人法，明人壽等同太虛，正法終竟，滅盡故法短也。

俱短者，生死既有虛妄，人亦有虛妄。

人法皆長者，又佛常、法常、比丘僧常，故長。

如此長短，為顯不長不短也。

第四明涅槃體。

前明經宗，通明一經之宗。今明體，涅槃一法體也。即為四：初、就一法明體，次、二法明體，三、三法明體，四、就四法明體。

言一法明體者，人法言是有故。下云：涅槃名為善有，舊云「妙有」也。有復為二義：一者本有，二者始有。義雖本始不同，並是常。本有此常，始有此常也。

今難此義，若涅槃有本有始，亦應有曾有今；若有曾有今，則成三世；三世無常，常法無曾無今者。常法無本如，既有本有始，則應有曾今，便成三世無常。

次二法明體者，則是二諦義。

莊嚴云：涅槃出二諦外。明惑因所感果是浮虛之故，是世諦；假體則空故，是真諦。今佛果非惑因所感故，非世諦；非世諦故不可則空，故非真諦。所以《仁王經》云：「薩云若覺，超度世諦第一義也。」

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 則會產生斷滅見；爲了破除這種見解，所以說有法存在。即使沒有人存在，善惡之法也不會消失，因此說明人是短暫的，法是長久的。

法短人長，這種情況比較少見，暫且簡單說明三我人（對「我」的執著，包括人我執、法我執、以及俱生我執），一同斷除煩惱，一同進入灰身滅智的狀態，還沒有分辨出法有終結的時候。現在說涅槃以及之前的人法，說明人的壽命等同於太虛空，正法最終完結，滅盡，所以說法是短暫的。

俱短，生死和人都是虛妄的。

人法皆長，又因為佛是常住的，法是常住的，比丘僧團是常住的，所以是長久的。

如此說明長短，是爲了顯示不長不短的道理。

第四部分說明涅槃的本體。

前面說明經的宗旨，是通盤說明整部經的宗旨。現在說明體，涅槃是一種法的本體。分為四個方面：首先，就一種法說明本體；其次，用兩種法說明本體；再次，用三種法說明本體；最後，就四種法說明本體。

說用一種法說明本體，是因為人法都說是存在的。下面說：『涅槃名為善有』，舊譯為『妙有』。有又分為兩種含義：一是本有，二是始有。意義雖然有本始的不同，但都是常。本有這種常，始有這種常。

現在對這種意義提出疑問，如果涅槃有本有始，也應該有曾有和今有；如果有曾有和今有，那就成了三世；三世是無常的，常法是沒有曾有和今有的。常法沒有本來如此，既然有本有始，那就應該有曾有和今有，便成了三世無常。

其次是用兩種法說明本體，那就是二諦義（世俗諦和勝義諦）。

《莊嚴經論》說：涅槃超出二諦之外。說明由迷惑的原因所感得的果報是虛浮不實的，這是世俗諦；假有的自體是空性的，這是真諦。現在佛的果位不是由迷惑的原因所感得的，所以不是世俗諦；不是世俗諦，所以不可說是空，所以不是真諦。所以《仁王經》說：『薩云若覺（一切智覺悟），超度世俗諦第一義諦。』

【English Translation】 English version Then arises the view of annihilation; to refute this view, it is said that there is Dharma. Even if there is no person, the laws of good and evil are not lost, hence it is clarified that people are short-lived and the Dharma is long-lasting.

That the Dharma is short and people are long-lived is rarely seen. Let's briefly explain that the three 'I's (the attachment to 'self', including the ego-attachment to person, ego-attachment to Dharma, and innate ego-attachment) together sever the bonds of affliction, together enter into the state of ashes and extinction, without yet distinguishing that the Dharma has an end. Now, saying Nirvana and the previous Dharma of people, it clarifies that the lifespan of people is equal to the great void, and the Proper Dharma ultimately concludes and is extinguished, hence the Dharma is short-lived.

Both are short-lived, as both birth and death and people are illusory.

Both people and Dharma are long-lasting, and also because the Buddha is eternal, the Dharma is eternal, and the Sangha of Bhikkhus is eternal, hence they are long-lasting.

Explaining the length in this way is to reveal the principle of neither long nor short.

The fourth part explains the substance of Nirvana.

The previous explanation of the doctrine of the Sutra is a comprehensive explanation of the doctrine of the entire Sutra. Now explaining the substance, Nirvana is the substance of one Dharma. It is divided into four aspects: first, explaining the substance with one Dharma; second, explaining the substance with two Dharmas; third, explaining the substance with three Dharmas; and fourth, explaining the substance with four Dharmas.

Saying to explain the substance with one Dharma is because both people and Dharma are said to exist. Below it says: 'Nirvana is called good existence', formerly translated as 'wonderful existence'. Existence is further divided into two meanings: one is original existence, and the other is initial existence. Although the meanings have differences in origin and beginning, both are constant. Originally there is this constancy, and initially there is this constancy.

Now questioning this meaning, if Nirvana has an origin and a beginning, it should also have a past and a present; if there is a past and a present, then it becomes the three times; the three times are impermanent, and the constant Dharma has no past and no present. The constant Dharma is not originally so, since there is an origin and a beginning, then there should be a past and a present, and it becomes the impermanence of the three times.

Secondly, explaining the substance with two Dharmas, that is the meaning of the two truths (conventional truth and ultimate truth).

The Śūraṅgama Sūtra says: Nirvana is beyond the two truths. It explains that the result felt by the cause of delusion is floating and unreal, this is the conventional truth; the illusory self is empty, this is the ultimate truth. Now the fruit of the Buddha is not felt by the cause of delusion, so it is not the conventional truth; it is not the conventional truth, so it cannot be said to be empty, so it is not the ultimate truth. Therefore, the Benevolent Kings Sutra says: 'Sarvajña-jñāna (all-knowing wisdom), transcends the conventional truth and the ultimate truth.'

---

開善解云：果涅槃具足二諦。涅槃是續待二假，故是世諦。非但則真，亦復冥真，故是二諦。

第三冶城師云：佛果非世諦則是真諦。明真諦是諸法之本，但眾生顛倒起惑，構造生死，遂成世諦。今還修道，斷惑生死盡，世諦則滅。世諦既滅，還歸本真。譬如清水，本性寂靜，假外風漸鼓擊致有波浪，風若息還收本性。

今皆不同此說。具如《二諦義》中廣破。今述：但今明佛果，非內非外、非有為非無為、非待非不待、非攝非不攝，豈可定言攝不攝耶？

故肇師云：「涅槃之為道也，寂寥虛廣，不可形名得；微妙無相，不可有心知。言之者違其真，知之者反其愚。有之者乖其性，無之者傷其軀。斯乃希夷之境，太玄之鄉，而以有無題[肆-聿+旁]，標其方域。而語神通者，不亦邈哉。」涅槃之體乃其如此，豈可以凡心推度，或言在二諦內，或言在二諦外耶？

次明三德者，明三法有三種：一者三聚，二者三性，三者三德也。

三聚者色、心、無作，今不釋此名，但佛果為具此三不？

成論師解此有三例：若是「心」則定有；「無作」定無；「色」一種則有多解。

一云：佛果乃盡粗色，則有妙色。故經云：「舍無常色，獲得常色」。又六卷云：「妙色湛然常安穩」

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 開善解釋說：『果涅槃』（Buddha's Nirvana）具足二諦（two truths）。涅槃是延續和對待二假，所以是世諦（conventional truth）。非但則是真，也冥合真，所以是二諦。

第三冶城師說：佛果不是世諦就是真諦（ultimate truth）。說明真諦是諸法的根本，只是眾生顛倒產生迷惑，構造生死，於是形成世諦。現在還修道，斷除迷惑，生死滅盡，世諦也就滅了。世諦既然滅了，就回歸本真。譬如清水，本性寂靜，因為外面的風逐漸鼓動衝擊才有了波浪，風如果停止，就回歸本性。

現在都不同意這種說法。詳細的論述在《二諦義》中廣泛地破斥了這些觀點。現在簡述：現在說明佛果，非內非外、非有為非無為、非待非不待、非攝非不攝，怎麼可以肯定地說攝或者不攝呢？

所以肇師說：『涅槃的道理，寂靜空曠，不可以形狀和名稱來獲得；微妙無相，不可以有心來知曉。說它的人違背了它的真諦，知曉它的人反而顯得愚蠢。說它有的人違背了它的本性，說它無的人傷害了它的軀體。這乃是希夷的境界，太玄的鄉土，卻用有無來題寫，標明它的方域。而談論神通的人，不是太渺茫了嗎？』涅槃的本體就是這樣，怎麼可以用凡人的心來推測度量，或者說在二諦之內，或者說在二諦之外呢？

接下來闡明三德，說明三法有三種：一是三聚，二是三性，三是三德。

三聚是色、心、無作，現在不解釋這些名稱，只是佛果是否具有這三者？

成論師解釋說，這裡有三種情況：如果是『心』，那就一定有；『無作』一定沒有；『色』這一種則有多種解釋。

一種說法是：佛果已經盡除了粗糙的色，所以有妙色。所以經中說：『捨棄無常的色，獲得常色』。又六卷中說：『妙色湛然，常安穩』。

【English Translation】 English version: Kaishan explains: 'Fruit Nirvana' (Buddha's Nirvana) fully possesses the two truths. Nirvana is the continuation and treatment of two falsehoods, so it is the conventional truth. It is not only the true, but also merges with the true, so it is the two truths.

The third Yecheng master said: The Buddha fruit is either the conventional truth or the ultimate truth. It clarifies that the ultimate truth is the root of all dharmas, but sentient beings are deluded and generate confusion, constructing birth and death, thus forming the conventional truth. Now, still cultivating the path, cutting off confusion, birth and death are exhausted, and the conventional truth is also extinguished. Since the conventional truth is extinguished, it returns to its original truth. For example, clear water, its original nature is tranquil, only because the external wind gradually drums and strikes it, there are waves. If the wind stops, it returns to its original nature.

Now, everyone disagrees with this statement. Detailed discussions extensively refute these views in 'The Meaning of Two Truths'. Now, a brief description: Now clarifying the Buddha fruit, it is neither internal nor external, neither conditioned nor unconditioned, neither dependent nor independent, neither included nor excluded. How can it be definitively said to be included or excluded?

Therefore, Master Zhao said: 'The principle of Nirvana is tranquil and vast, it cannot be obtained by shape and name; subtle and without form, it cannot be known by the mind. Those who speak of it violate its true meaning, and those who know it appear foolish. Those who say it exists violate its nature, and those who say it does not exist harm its body. This is the realm of the subtle and mysterious, the land of the profound, but it is inscribed with existence and non-existence, marking its boundaries. And those who talk about supernatural powers, aren't they too vague?' The essence of Nirvana is like this, how can it be speculated and measured with the mind of ordinary people, or said to be within the two truths, or said to be outside the two truths?

Next, clarifying the three virtues, explaining that the three dharmas have three types: first, the three aggregates; second, the three natures; third, the three virtues.

The three aggregates are form (rupa), mind (citta), and non-action (anabhisaṃskhāra). Now, these names are not explained, but does the Buddha fruit possess these three?

The Cheng Lun master explains that there are three cases here: if it is 'mind', then it certainly exists; 'non-action' certainly does not exist; 'form' has multiple interpretations.

One view is: the Buddha fruit has already exhausted the coarse form, so it has wonderful form. Therefore, the sutra says: 'Abandon impermanent form, obtain permanent form'. Also, the sixth volume says: 'Wonderful form is clear and stable, always peaceful'.

---

。又經云：「解脫有二體，一色、二無色」。無色者，聲聞解脫。色者，諸佛解脫也。第二云：佛果無色。色是頑礙之法，不可研磨，增進佛果之時靈智獨存，無有「色」與「無作」也。——而經中道「妙色」者有二義：一能應為無窮之色，二者妙果顯然故，故為色耳。——故《六經》云：「愿諸眾生滅一切色，入于無色大般涅槃也」。

「地論」明三佛皆有色作身，色可知。釋身色者如經，一一相，海無量，諸相雖有此色，而不可見。《地經》說佛相好，為實報身也。法身色者，如來藏中色性法門顯現成佛體。體雖是色，而無色相。如比丘無作，雖是色性，而無色相。又云：法身出生，法則無盡色像。又云：無礙之色，如無像之形，不同下地因中也。

論心者雖舍無常識，獲得常識，涅槃以為體，但心為體。（但心有三：一、「六識心」緣外境，二、「七識心」緣內法，此二皆滅，唯第三「八識」唯真識覺知也。）

論「非色心」者，無生死色、心，亦名非色心也。

又常釋「色」至處者，成論師凡有四說：

一：欲、色兩界有色，無色界無色。

第二云：三界並有色，三界外乃無色。何者？六地已還，身土分段有色土，七地已上，出三界外無複色，而是四空無色者，無粗色

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 另有經文說：『解脫有兩種體性，一是色，二是無色。』無色是指聲聞乘的解脫，色是指諸佛的解脫。還有經文說：佛果沒有（此處原文缺失，指阻礙）。是頑固阻礙之法，不可磨滅。當增進佛果時，靈智獨自存在，沒有『色』與『無作』。——而經文中說的『妙色』有兩種含義：一是指能應現為無窮的色相，二是妙果顯現的緣故，所以稱為色。——因此《六經》說：『愿一切眾生滅除一切色相，進入無色的大般涅槃。』

《地論》闡明三佛都有色作身，色是可以知曉的。解釋身色，如經文所說，一一相好，如海無量，諸相雖然有此色，但不可見。《地經》所說的佛相好，是實報身。法身之色，是如來藏中色性法門顯現而成的佛體。體雖然是色，但沒有色相。如同比丘的無作，雖然是色性，但沒有色相。又有經文說：法身出生，法則具有無盡的色像。還有經文說：無礙之色，如同沒有形象的形體，不同於下地因中的情況。

關於心，雖然捨棄了無常識，獲得了常識，以涅槃為體，但心仍然是體。（但心有三種：一是『六識心』緣于外境，二是『七識心』緣于內法，這兩種都會滅除，只有第三種『八識』是唯一的真識覺知。）

關於『非色心』，沒有生死的色、心，也稱為非色心。

還有常釋『色』至處，成論師大致有四種說法：

第一種：欲界、色界有色，無色界沒有色。

第二種說法：三界都有色，三界之外才沒有色。為什麼呢？六地及以下，身土分段有色土，七地及以上，超出三界之外就沒有色了，而四空無色界，是沒有粗色。

【English Translation】 English version: Furthermore, the sutra says: 'There are two natures of liberation: one is form (色, se), and the other is formlessness (無色, wuse).' Formlessness refers to the liberation of the Śrāvakas (聲聞, shengwen), while form refers to the liberation of all Buddhas. Another sutra says: The fruit of Buddhahood has no * (missing in the original text, referring to obstruction). * is a stubborn and obstructive dharma (法, fa) that cannot be eradicated. When advancing towards the fruit of Buddhahood, spiritual wisdom alone exists, without 'form' or 'non-action (無作, wuzuo).' -- And the 'subtle form (妙色, miaose)' mentioned in the sutra has two meanings: one is that it can manifest as infinite forms, and the second is that the subtle fruit is clearly manifested, hence it is called form. -- Therefore, the Six Sutras say: 'May all sentient beings extinguish all forms and enter the great Nirvana (涅槃, niepan) of formlessness.'

The Treatise on the Stages of the Earth (地論, Dilun) clarifies that all three Buddhas have a form-created body (色作身, sezhuoshen), and form can be known. Explaining the form of the body, as the sutra says, each and every characteristic is like the immeasurable ocean. Although all characteristics have this form, they are invisible. The Buddha's excellent characteristics mentioned in the Earth Sutra (地經, Dijin) are the body of actual reward (實報身, shibaoshen). The form of the Dharmakaya (法身, fashen) is the Buddha-body manifested from the form-nature dharma-gate (色性法門, sexingfamen) within the Tathagatagarbha (如來藏, rulaizang). Although the body is form, it has no form-appearance. Like the non-action of a Bhikshu (比丘, biqiu), although it is form-nature, it has no form-appearance. Furthermore, it is said: When the Dharmakaya is born, the principles have endless form-images. It is also said: The unobstructed form is like a form without image, different from the situation in the causal stage of the lower realms.

Regarding the mind, although it abandons impermanent consciousness and obtains permanent consciousness, taking Nirvana as its essence, the mind is still the essence. (But there are three types of mind: first, the 'six consciousnesses mind (六識心, liushixin)' is related to external objects; second, the 'seven consciousnesses mind (七識心, qishixin)' is related to internal dharmas; both of these will be extinguished, and only the third, the 'eight consciousnesses (八識, bashi),' is the only true consciousness awareness.)

Regarding 'non-form mind (非色心, feisexin),' there is no form or mind of birth and death, which is also called non-form mind.

Furthermore, regarding the constant explanation of 'form' to the place, the Cheng Lun Shi (成論師) roughly has four statements:

First: The desire realm (欲界, yujie) and the form realm (色界, sejie) have form, while the formless realm (無色界, wusejie) has no form.

The second statement: All three realms have form, and only outside the three realms is there no form. Why? At the sixth ground (地, di) and below, the body and land have segmented form-land; at the seventh ground and above, there is no form outside the three realms, and the four formless realms (四空無色界, sikongwusejie) have no coarse form.

---

耳。

第三解云：六地穢國土地，二國中間，猶有如影知光色，八地已上則無複色。

第四解：金剛心則有色，唯佛無色。而言界外意生身者，爾時無復一期壽命，但有唸唸生滅，名為變易，故云意生身耳，無作一法窮至金剛也。

今明皆不然。若言佛果定有色者，則應長短質像，則有處所；若定無色，亦應無心。何者？色是心依因，既無有色，心何所依？若言色是頑礙，故須離者；心是無常，亦應須離。又心是取相之法，亦應須除。若轉取相心為無相心者，亦應轉頑礙之色為無礙色。又嘆如來無色應為色者，亦無心應為心。

解云：心為體，汝何心為體？汝舍粗心，以妙心為體；應舍粗色，妙色為體也。

今明：若言一切皆無，是無不待于有，是故性無。有亦然也。故今有不乖無，無不妨有；有無自立，色心無礙也。

第二、顯三性明體。

三性：善、惡、無記。釋此三，亦三例：

善，一向定有。惡，一向定無。

無記，復有二解：

第一、光宅明佛果有二種無記：一、知解無記，二、果報無記。知解者，如基射馭，闡提亦有故非善，佛地亦有故非惡，故有無記性也。果報者，如生死中苦無常，釋既非惡，但是無記，涅槃之地，常、樂、我、凈亦

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 耳。

第三種解釋說：六地（菩薩修行第六個階段）穢國（不清凈的國土）的土地，與二國（指兩個不同的國土）中間，仍然有如影子般感知光和顏色的能力，八地（菩薩修行第八個階段）及以上就沒有顏色的概念了。

第四種解釋：金剛心（堅定不移的菩提心）還有顏色的概念，只有佛沒有顏色的概念。說到界外意生身（超出三界，由意念化生的身），那時就沒有固定的壽命，只有唸唸生滅，這被稱為變易，所以說是意生身，沒有通過修行達到金剛不壞的境界。

現在我認為這些說法都不對。如果說佛果一定有顏色，那麼就應該有長短形狀，也應該有處所；如果一定沒有顏色，也應該沒有心。為什麼呢？因為色是心所依賴的，既然沒有色，心依靠什麼呢？如果說色是頑固障礙，所以要捨棄；心是無常的，也應該捨棄。而且心是執取表象的方法，也應該去除。如果能將執取表象的心轉變為無相的心，也應該將頑固障礙的色轉變為無礙的色。又讚歎如來無色而應化為色，也應讚歎無心而應化為心。

解釋說：心是本體，你以什麼心為本體？你捨棄粗糙的心，以微妙的心為本體；也應該捨棄粗糙的色，以微妙的色為本體。

現在我認為：如果說一切皆無，那麼這個『無』就依賴於『有』，所以本質是『無』。『有』也是這樣。所以現在『有』不妨礙『無』，『無』不妨礙『有』；『有』和『無』各自成立，色和心之間沒有障礙。

第二、闡明三性，顯明本體。

三性：善、惡、無記（非善非惡）。解釋這三性，也有三種例子：

善，一向是確定的有。惡，一向是確定的無。

無記，又有兩種解釋：

第一、光宅（指光宅寺）認為佛果有兩種無記：一、知解無記，二、果報無記。知解無記，比如駕車射箭，闡提（斷絕善根的人）也有，所以不是善；佛地也有，所以不是惡，所以有無記性。果報無記，比如生死中的苦和無常，既然不是惡，就只是無記；涅槃之地，常、樂、我、凈也是。

【English Translation】 English version: Ear.

The third explanation says: The land of the impure lands of the sixth Bhumi (sixth stage of Bodhisattva practice), between the two lands (referring to two different lands), still has the ability to perceive light and color like a shadow. The eighth Bhumi (eighth stage of Bodhisattva practice) and above have no concept of color.

The fourth explanation: The Vajra heart (unwavering Bodhi heart) still has the concept of color, only the Buddha has no concept of color. Speaking of the Manomayakaya (mind-made body) beyond the realm, at that time there is no fixed lifespan, only the arising and ceasing of thoughts, which is called transformation, so it is called Manomayakaya, without reaching the indestructible state of Vajra through practice.

Now I think these statements are not correct. If it is said that Buddhahood must have color, then there should be length and shape, and there should also be a place; if there is definitely no color, there should also be no mind. Why? Because form is what the mind depends on, since there is no form, what does the mind depend on? If it is said that form is stubborn and obstructive, so it must be abandoned; the mind is impermanent, it should also be abandoned. Moreover, the mind is the method of grasping appearances, it should also be removed. If one can transform the mind that grasps appearances into a formless mind, one should also transform the stubborn and obstructive form into unobstructed form. Also, praising the Tathagata as formless and transforming into form, one should also praise the mindless and transforming into mind.

The explanation says: The mind is the substance, what mind do you take as the substance? You abandon the coarse mind and take the subtle mind as the substance; you should also abandon the coarse form and take the subtle form as the substance.

Now I think: If it is said that everything is non-existent, then this 'non-existence' depends on 'existence', so the essence is 'non-existence'. 'Existence' is also like this. So now 'existence' does not hinder 'non-existence', and 'non-existence' does not hinder 'existence'; 'existence' and 'non-existence' are established independently, and there is no obstacle between form and mind.

Second, clarify the three natures and reveal the substance.

The three natures: good, evil, and neutral (neither good nor evil). To explain these three natures, there are also three examples:

Good is always definitely existent. Evil is always definitely non-existent.

Neutral has two explanations:

First, Guangzhai (referring to Guangzhai Temple) believes that there are two kinds of neutral in Buddhahood: first, cognitive neutral, and second, resultant neutral. Cognitive neutral, such as driving a car and shooting arrows, is also present in Icchantikas (those who have severed their roots of goodness), so it is not good; it is also present in the Buddha-land, so it is not evil, so there is a neutral nature. Resultant neutral, such as suffering and impermanence in Samsara, since it is not evil, it is only neutral; the permanence, bliss, self, and purity of Nirvana are also neutral.

---

非是善，並是無記也。

第二、開善、莊嚴並云是善非復無記。次通彼二種無記之善，莊嚴明知解應是善。開善通三性，闡提是惡，佛則是善也。果報者，生死之中多有異具，故果報可是無記；佛果唯有習果，無復報法，寧可類此是無記耶？

今所明涅槃之體，非善非不善，非記非不記，無一定相。善巧方便，無所不是善不善。有時為對不善，如複道是善。故云：諸惡已斷，眾善普會。

第三、明三德者，涅槃乃具萬德，而經文略言三德耳。

但從來教三德凡有三師：

第一、莊嚴云：法身語其體，般若、解脫明其用。勝難多不出智、斷。般若智，解脫斷，體具智、斷，故言三也。

第二、開善云：對付昔日二種涅槃，故言三德。昔日有餘身，智雖在，解脫未具；今日身知在時，解脫已具，則是斥彼有餘。昔日無餘，子果累盡，解脫乃具，而無復身智；今明解脫具時，而有身智，則斥彼無常。

第三、合二解，合用兩義。直論今教，如莊嚴。若對今昔，則如開善也。

今明若無所得因緣假說，無法不得。但此三釋無文證據，直是義推。今謂此等各有妨難，所以不可具論。

初家凡有兩難：一者、明三德本共為涅槃體，云何但以法身為體？又且法身亦得為用，

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：不是善，就都是無記（既非善也非惡的狀態）。

第二種觀點，開善法師和莊嚴法師都認為涅槃是善，不再是無記。進一步說，他們認為無記也可以是善的，莊嚴法師明確指出知解應是善。開善法師則認為涅槃通於三性（善、惡、無記），闡提（斷善根的人）是惡，佛則是善。關於果報，生死輪迴中有多種不同的果報，所以果報可以是無記；但佛的果位只有習果（由長期熏習而成的果），沒有報法（由業力感召的果報），怎麼能把涅槃歸類為無記呢？

現在所闡明的是涅槃的本體，它非善非不善，非記非不記，沒有一定的相狀。善巧方便，無所不是善或不善。有時爲了對治不善，就假說它是善。所以說：『諸惡已斷，眾善普會。』

第三，闡明三德，涅槃本具萬德，而經文只是簡略地說了三德。

但歷來關於三德的教說，主要有三位法師的觀點：

第一種，莊嚴法師認為：法身是涅槃的本體，般若（智慧）、解脫是涅槃的作用。勝鬘經大多沒有超出智、斷的範圍。般若是智慧，解脫是斷除煩惱，本體具備智、斷，所以說是三德。

第二種，開善法師認為：這是爲了對治過去所說的兩種涅槃，所以才說三德。過去的有餘涅槃，雖然有身智，但解脫還不圓滿；現在身智存在時，解脫已經圓滿，這是爲了破斥過去的有餘涅槃。過去的無餘涅槃，子果（煩惱和業）都已斷盡，解脫是圓滿了，卻沒有身智；現在闡明解脫圓滿時，而有身智，這是爲了破斥過去的無常涅槃。

第三種，綜合以上兩種解釋，兼采兩家的意義。如果只論現在的教義，就如莊嚴法師所說。如果對照過去和現在，就如開善法師所說。

現在闡明，如果沒有無所得的因緣，就只能假說，沒有什麼是不能得到的。但這三種解釋都沒有經文的證據，只是從義理上推論。我認為這些解釋各有妨礙和困難，所以不能一一詳述。

第一家（莊嚴法師）的觀點主要有兩個難點：一是，闡明三德本來共同作為涅槃的本體，為什麼只說法身是本體？而且法身也可以作為作用。

【English Translation】 English version: It is not good; all are 'avyākrta' (undetermined, neither good nor bad).

Secondly, both Kaishan and Zhuangyan say that 'nirvana' is good and no longer 'avyākrta'. Furthermore, they both consider 'avyākrta' can be good, and Zhuangyan clearly points out that 'understanding' should be good. Kaishan considers it to be of the three natures (good, evil, and undetermined), 'icchantika' (one who has severed their roots of good) is evil, and Buddha is good. Regarding 'vipāka' (retribution), there are many different forms in 'samsara' (cycle of birth and death), so 'vipāka' can be 'avyākrta'; but the fruit of Buddhahood only has 'adhipati-phala' (result of habituation), and no 'vipāka-dharma' (law of retribution), how can 'nirvana' be classified as 'avyākrta'?

Now, what is being clarified is the essence of 'nirvana', which is neither good nor not good, neither determined nor undetermined, without a fixed form. Skillful means, there is nothing that is not good or not good. Sometimes, in order to counteract the not good, it is said to be good. Therefore, it is said: 'All evils have been cut off, and all good has been universally assembled.'

Thirdly, explaining the three virtues, 'nirvana' inherently possesses myriad virtues, but the scriptures only briefly mention the three virtues.

However, there have traditionally been three masters regarding the teachings on the three virtues:

Firstly, Zhuangyan says: 'Dharmakaya' (body of the Dharma) speaks of its essence, 'prajna' (wisdom) and 'vimukti' (liberation) clarify its function. The 'Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda Sūtra' mostly does not go beyond wisdom and cessation. 'Prajna' is wisdom, 'vimukti' is cessation, the essence possesses wisdom and cessation, therefore it is said to be three virtues.

Secondly, Kaishan says: It is in response to the two types of 'nirvana' of the past that the three virtues are spoken of. In the 'nirvana' with remainder of the past, although wisdom exists, liberation is not complete; now, when body and wisdom exist, liberation is already complete, which is to refute the 'nirvana' with remainder of the past. In the 'nirvana' without remainder of the past, the seeds and fruits (of karma) are exhausted, liberation is complete, but there is no body or wisdom; now, it is clarified that when liberation is complete, there is body and wisdom, which is to refute the impermanent 'nirvana' of the past.

Thirdly, combining the two explanations, adopting the meanings of both. Directly discussing the present teachings, it is like Zhuangyan. If comparing the past and present, it is like Kaishan.

Now, it is clarified that if there is no cause and condition of non-attainment, it can only be hypothetically said, there is nothing that cannot be attained. But these three explanations have no scriptural evidence, they are merely inferences from meaning. I believe that these explanations each have obstacles and difficulties, so they cannot be fully discussed.

The first school (Zhuangyan) mainly has two difficulties: Firstly, it clarifies that the three virtues originally jointly serve as the essence of 'nirvana', why only say that 'dharmakaya' is the essence? Moreover, 'dharmakaya' can also serve as a function.

---

豈謂智斷偏為用耶？若云身是體異名，故以法身當體者，下文云「涅槃名解脫」應以解脫當名，而今不以解脫者，當那忽以法身當解。二者、文中自道縱亦不成，別異亦不成，三法曾無縱橫之異。豈有體用之殊？若有體用，有本末，若有本末，則有劣勝。

云、次難復解：若言斥昔涅槃，故言三德者，此名數殊不相組對，如破邪三寶則言正三寶。今破二涅槃明二德，又以法身般若斥無餘者，亦應以解脫常住斥彼有餘，何者昔日有餘，何但解脫未足，亦非常住？今若正言解脫，不言常住者，亦應無餘，正言法身，不言般若。

第三既具用兩釋，具招二難也。

今明：直是教門不同，故偏具。為昔日不堪具說，方便偏說一解脫；今大心發故，說三德圓伊涅槃。興皇師云：「無感不應故云法身，無境不照名為般若，無累不盡故云解脫。」

又，明三德為開如來三密，故迦葉問愿，佛開微密，廣為眾生說也。如此三密並《四相品》是也。亦是對凡夫三業，凡夫三業不密故。

又，為對生死三障明涅槃三德：對報障明法身，對業障明解脫，對煩惱障明般若，生死只三障，故涅槃唯有三德也。

次約四法明：亦體即是「四德」。此德亦無定，或一圓是「妙有」也；有時明二，即「妙有」及「

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：怎麼能說智慧和斷滅只是片面的作用呢？如果說『身』只是『體』的另一個名稱，所以用『法身』（Dharmakaya，佛的法性之身）來代表『體』，那麼下文說『涅槃』（Nirvana，寂滅）名為『解脫』（Moksha，從輪迴中解脫）時，就應該用『解脫』來代表『名』。但現在不用『解脫』，為何突然用『法身』來代表『解脫』呢？這兩種說法，即使在文義上勉強成立，在本質上也是不成立的，法身、般若（Prajna，智慧）、解脫這三法，從來沒有縱向或橫向的差異，怎麼會有體和用、本和末的區別呢？如果有體用、本末的區別，就會有優劣之分。 有人辯解說：『之所以說三德，是爲了駁斥過去的涅槃。』這種說法名目不同，不能相互對應。比如破斥邪三寶，就說正三寶。現在破斥二種涅槃，闡明二德，又用法身和般若來駁斥無餘涅槃，也應該用解脫和常住來駁斥有餘涅槃。過去的有餘涅槃，不僅解脫不圓滿，也不是常住的。如果現在只說解脫，不說常住，那麼無餘涅槃也應該只說法身，不說般若。 第三種說法既包含了兩種解釋，也同時招致了兩種責難。 現在說明：這只是教法門徑不同，所以說法有所側重。因為過去（眾生的根器）不堪具足宣說，所以方便地偏說一種解脫；現在大心已經發起，所以宣說三德圓滿的涅槃。興皇師說：『沒有感應不能應化，所以稱為法身；沒有境界不能照見，所以名為般若；沒有煩惱不能斷盡，所以稱為解脫。』 而且，闡明三德是爲了開啟如來的三密（身密、語密、意密），所以迦葉（Kasyapa，佛陀的弟子）請問發願，佛陀開啟微妙秘密，廣泛地為眾生宣說。像這樣的三密和《四相品》就是例證。這也是針對凡夫的三業（身業、語業、意業）而言，凡夫的三業不秘密。 而且，爲了針對生死的三障（報障、業障、煩惱障）闡明涅槃的三德：針對報障闡明法身，針對業障闡明解脫，針對煩惱障闡明般若。生死只有這三障，所以涅槃也只有三德。 其次，從四法（常、樂、我、凈）來說明：體性也就是『四德』。這四德也沒有定性，有時一個圓滿就是『妙有』；有時闡明兩個，就是『妙有』和『

【English Translation】 English version: How can it be said that wisdom and cessation are merely partial functions? If it is argued that 『body』 is just another name for 『essence,』 and therefore 『Dharmakaya』 (the Dharma-body of the Buddha) is used to represent 『essence,』 then when the text below says 『Nirvana』 (extinction) is named 『Moksha』 (liberation from samsara), 『Moksha』 should be used to represent 『name.』 But now, 『Moksha』 is not used, so why suddenly use 『Dharmakaya』 to represent 『Moksha』? These two assertions, even if they barely hold up in meaning, are fundamentally untenable. The three Dharmas—Dharmakaya, Prajna (wisdom), and Moksha—have never had any vertical or horizontal differences. How can there be distinctions of essence and function, root and branch? If there are distinctions of essence and function, root and branch, then there will be superior and inferior. Someone might argue: 『The reason for speaking of the three virtues is to refute the past Nirvana.』 This kind of statement has different terms and cannot be matched up. For example, when refuting the evil Three Jewels, one speaks of the correct Three Jewels. Now, refuting the two Nirvanas clarifies the two virtues, and using Dharmakaya and Prajna to refute the Nirvana without remainder should also use liberation and permanence to refute the Nirvana with remainder. In the past Nirvana with remainder, not only was liberation incomplete, but it was also not permanent. If now only liberation is spoken of, and not permanence, then in the Nirvana without remainder, only Dharmakaya should be spoken of, and not Prajna. The third statement contains both explanations and invites both criticisms. Now, it is clarified: It is simply that the teachings differ, so the emphasis varies. Because in the past (the capacity of beings) was not sufficient for complete exposition, it was convenient to partially speak of one liberation; now that the great mind has arisen, the complete Nirvana with three virtues is expounded. Master Xinghuang said: 『Without sensation, there can be no response, hence it is called Dharmakaya; without a realm, there can be no illumination, hence it is called Prajna; without afflictions, there can be no complete cessation, hence it is called Moksha.』 Moreover, clarifying the three virtues is to open the three secrets (body, speech, and mind) of the Tathagata, so Kasyapa (a disciple of the Buddha) asked and made a vow, and the Buddha opened the subtle secrets, widely expounding them for sentient beings. Examples of such three secrets and the 『Four Aspects Chapter』 are evidence of this. This is also in response to the three karmas (body, speech, and mind) of ordinary beings, whose three karmas are not secret. Moreover, to address the three obstacles of samsara (retribution, karma, and affliction), the three virtues of Nirvana are clarified: Dharmakaya is clarified in response to the obstacle of retribution, Moksha is clarified in response to the obstacle of karma, and Prajna is clarified in response to the obstacle of affliction. Samsara has only these three obstacles, so Nirvana has only three virtues. Next, speaking from the perspective of the four qualities (permanence, bliss, self, purity): the essence is also the 『four virtues.』 These four virtues are also not fixed; sometimes one completeness is 『wonderful existence』; sometimes two are clarified, which are 『wonderful existence』 and 『

---

我」；有時明「三德」鄰「三修法」也；四、可解「五德」對彼五門；有時「八德」則八味也。

一德有二行，二德有四行，三德有六行，四德有八行，五德有十行，八德有十六行也。

行有三雙：生死涅槃明行解，生死在無常為行解，涅槃樂為行。此八行解乃得涅槃四德也。

二明因果：因在無常，果常樂我。

三約本跡：跡在無常，本身常、樂、我也。

八味者，開善四德為八味，謂：一常、二恒、三安、四無垢、五不老、六不死、七快樂、八清涼。

開善為恒，河西云常，「常」、「恒」者名異義一。不從緣生為「常」，始終真實為「恒」；開「樂」為「安」，內無惱為「樂」，外不危曰「安」也；不老、不死是「我」（我故不老，我故不死也）；清涼、無垢並是「凈」義也。

涅槃復有八相，如文云：好體對五門應明五德，但不凈觀在初，聖人不為，但有四倒，四德對四倒，故明四行四德也。

又對四人明四因四德。四人者：則闡提、外道、聲聞、緣覺也，四因者：謂信心、般若、虛空三昧、大悲。破闡提不信明信，信故得凈德也；般若對外道，外道著我人一異，般若正慧破一異，我心故明。般若故得真我德；虛空三昧破聲聞厭苦無常，在可厭故得三昧，

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：有時闡明『三德』，對應于『三修法』；第四，可以解釋『五德』對應于那五個門（五根）；有時『八德』則指八味。

一德有二行，二德有四行，三德有六行，四德有八行，五德有十行，八德有十六行。

行有三雙：生死涅槃明行解，生死在於無常為行解，涅槃在於樂為行。這八行解才能得到涅槃四德。

二明因果：因在於無常，果在於常樂我。

三約本跡：跡在於無常，本身在於常、樂、我。

八味指的是，開善四德展開為八味，即：一常（Nitya），二恒（Steady），三安（Peaceful），四無垢（Immaculate），五不老（Non-aging），六不死（Deathless），七快樂（Joyful），八清涼（Cool）。

開善對應于恒，河西說常，『常』、『恒』名稱不同意義相同。不從因緣生為『常』，始終真實為『恒』；開『樂』為『安』，內心沒有煩惱為『樂』，外在沒有危險叫做『安』；不老、不死是『我』（因為我是不老的，因為我是不死的）；清涼、無垢都是『凈』的含義。

涅槃還有八相，如經文所說：好體對應五門應該闡明五德，但是不凈觀在最初，聖人不修習，只有四倒，四德對應四倒，所以闡明四行四德。

又對應四種人闡明四因四德。四種人是：闡提（Icchantika，斷善根者），外道（Tirthika，佛教以外的修行者），聲聞（Sravaka，聽聞佛法而悟道者），緣覺（Pratyekabuddha，不依師教而獨自悟道者）。四因是：信心（Faith），般若（Prajna，智慧），虛空三昧（Akasa-samadhi，如虛空般的三昧），大悲（Maha-karuna，偉大的慈悲）。破除闡提的不信而闡明信心，因為有信心所以得到凈德；般若對應外道，外道執著於我人一異，般若正慧破除一異，我心因此而明。因為般若所以得到真我德；虛空三昧破除聲聞厭惡痛苦和無常，因為（聲聞）認為（輪迴）是可厭惡的，所以得到三昧。

【English Translation】 English version: Sometimes it clarifies the 'Three Virtues' corresponding to the 'Three Practices'; fourth, it can explain the 'Five Virtues' corresponding to those five gates (five roots); sometimes 'Eight Virtues' refer to the eight flavors.

One virtue has two practices, two virtues have four practices, three virtues have six practices, four virtues have eight practices, five virtues have ten practices, and eight virtues have sixteen practices.

Practices have three pairs: birth-and-death and Nirvana, understanding practice; birth-and-death lies in impermanence as understanding practice, Nirvana lies in bliss as practice. These eight understanding practices can attain the four virtues of Nirvana.

Second, clarify cause and effect: the cause lies in impermanence, the effect lies in permanence, bliss, and self.

Third, regarding the fundamental and the traces: the traces lie in impermanence, the fundamental self lies in permanence, bliss, and self.

The eight flavors refer to the expansion of the four virtues of Kaisan into eight flavors, namely: 1. Permanence (Nitya), 2. Steadiness, 3. Peacefulness, 4. Immaculateness, 5. Non-aging, 6. Deathlessness, 7. Joyfulness, 8. Coolness.

Kaisan corresponds to Steadiness, Hexi says Permanence, 'Permanence' and 'Steadiness' have different names but the same meaning. Not arising from conditions is 'Permanence', being true from beginning to end is 'Steadiness'; expanding 'Bliss' into 'Peacefulness', having no afflictions within is 'Bliss', having no dangers outside is called 'Peacefulness'; Non-aging and Deathlessness are 'Self' (because I am non-aging, because I am deathless); Coolness and Immaculateness both have the meaning of 'Purity'.

Nirvana also has eight aspects, as the text says: a good body corresponding to the five gates should clarify the five virtues, but the contemplation of impurity is at the beginning, which sages do not practice, there are only the four inversions, the four virtues correspond to the four inversions, so clarify the four practices and four virtues.

Also, corresponding to the four types of people, clarify the four causes and four virtues. The four types of people are: Icchantika (those who have severed their roots of goodness), Tirthika (non-Buddhist practitioners), Sravaka (those who attain enlightenment by hearing the Buddha's teachings), and Pratyekabuddha (those who attain enlightenment independently without a teacher). The four causes are: Faith, Prajna (wisdom), Akasa-samadhi (samadhi like space), and Maha-karuna (great compassion). Overcoming the Icchantika's disbelief and clarifying faith, because of faith, one attains the virtue of purity; Prajna corresponds to the Tirthika, the Tirthika is attached to the oneness and difference of self and others, Prajna's correct wisdom overcomes oneness and difference, therefore my mind is clear. Because of Prajna, one attains the virtue of true self; Akasa-samadhi overcomes the Sravaka's aversion to suffering and impermanence, because (the Sravaka) considers (samsara) to be repulsive, therefore one attains samadhi.

---

三昧故得樂德也；大悲對緣覺，緣覺著無常果永入滅，無大悲故。大悲破無常得常德也。為對四人明四因，故釋四德也。

但此四德，《大經》辨其名數不同。

「常」不見別名數，直明常而恒耳——但無常有二種：一生滅，二流動——對生滅故言常，流動故言恒也。

「樂」名數不同，經云有佛二樂：謂覺知樂及寂滅樂。實相樂之三樂無愛樂。佛性一樂謂菩提樂也。復有四樂：一、斷樂，若不斷樂還成有斷，在復斷樂，故名大樂；二、寂滅樂；三、一切智樂，若不知則若一切智故樂；四、身不壞故樂。

「我」有八自在，義如經也。

「凈」有四種：一、有凈，離二十五有。二、樂凈，凡夫一樂不凈也。三、身凈，身無常不凈。四、心凈，心有漏則不凈，無漏故凈也。

次、第五明涅槃用。就此亦有三義：一者、明本有用，二者、明照境用，三者、明發智用。

今第一明本有用。但前已略明本有義，此義未顯，今更廣明之也。然古來有三解。

第一靈味寶亮：生死之中已有真神之法，但未顯現，如蔽黃金。《如來藏》經云：如人弊帛裹黃金像墮泥中，無人知者，有得天眼者，提凈洗則金像宛然，真神亦爾，本來已有常住佛體，萬德宛然，但為煩惱所覆，若斷煩惱

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 通過三昧才能獲得樂德；大悲心針對緣覺（Pratyekabuddha，獨自覺悟者），緣覺執著于無常的果報而永遠進入寂滅，因為他們沒有大悲心。大悲心能破除無常，獲得常德。爲了針對四種人闡明四種原因，所以解釋了四德。 但是這四德，《大般涅槃經》（Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra）辨析了它們的名目和數量的不同。 『常』沒有特別的名目和數量，只是說明它是常住和恒久的——但是無常有兩種：一是生滅，二是流動——針對生滅而言是常，針對流動而言是恒。 『樂』的名目和數量不同，《大般涅槃經》說佛有二樂：即覺知樂和寂滅樂。實相樂、三樂沒有愛樂。佛性一樂是指菩提樂。 又有四樂：一、斷樂，如果不斷除，樂還會成為有斷，再次斷除樂，所以名為大樂；二、寂滅樂；三、一切智樂，如果不知道一切，那麼因為一切智而快樂；四、身體不壞所以快樂。 『我』有八自在，意義如經中所說。 『凈』有四種：一、有凈，遠離二十五有（二十五種存在狀態）。二、樂凈，凡夫的樂是不清凈的。三、身凈，身體無常不清凈。四、心凈，心有煩惱則不清凈，沒有煩惱所以清凈。 其次，第五說明涅槃（Nirvana，寂滅）的作用。就此也有三種意義：一是說明本有的作用，二是說明照境的作用，三是說明發智的作用。 現在第一說明本有的作用。但是前面已經略微說明了本有的意義，這個意義還不明顯，現在更廣泛地說明它。然而古來有三種解釋。 第一種是靈味寶亮的觀點：在生死之中已經有真神之法，只是沒有顯現，如同被遮蔽的黃金。《如來藏經》（Tathāgatagarbha Sūtra）說：如同有人用破布包裹著黃金像，掉入泥中，沒有人知道，有得到天眼的人，把它提起來洗乾淨，那麼金像就完整地顯現出來，真神也是這樣，本來已經有常住的佛體，萬德完整地具備，只是被煩惱所覆蓋，如果斷除煩惱

【English Translation】 English version: Only through Samadhi (concentration) can one attain the virtue of bliss; Great Compassion is directed towards Pratyekabuddhas (Solitary Buddhas), who cling to the impermanent fruits and enter Nirvana (extinction) forever, because they lack Great Compassion. Great Compassion can break through impermanence and attain the virtue of permanence. To address the four types of people and clarify the four causes, the four virtues are explained. However, regarding these four virtues, the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra (Great Nirvana Sutra) distinguishes their names and numbers differently. 'Permanence' does not have a separate name or number, it simply clarifies that it is permanent and constant—but there are two types of impermanence: one is arising and ceasing, and the other is flowing—'permanence' is spoken of in relation to arising and ceasing, and 'constancy' is spoken of in relation to flowing. The names and numbers of 'Bliss' are different. The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra says that the Buddha has two kinds of bliss: namely, the bliss of awareness and the bliss of quiescence. The bliss of true reality and the three kinds of bliss do not have the bliss of attachment. The one bliss of Buddha-nature refers to Bodhi (enlightenment) bliss. There are also four kinds of bliss: first, the bliss of cessation; if it is not ceased, bliss will still become something to be ceased, and then bliss is ceased again, so it is called great bliss; second, the bliss of quiescence; third, the bliss of all-knowing wisdom, if one does not know everything, then one is happy because of all-knowing wisdom; fourth, the bliss because the body does not decay. 'Self' has eight freedoms, the meaning is as stated in the sutra. 'Purity' has four kinds: first, the purity of existence, being apart from the twenty-five existences. Second, the purity of bliss, the bliss of ordinary people is impure. Third, the purity of the body, the body is impermanent and impure. Fourth, the purity of the mind, the mind with outflows is impure, without outflows it is pure. Next, the fifth explains the function of Nirvana. Regarding this, there are also three meanings: first, to explain the inherent function; second, to explain the function of illuminating objects; and third, to explain the function of generating wisdom. Now, the first explains the inherent function. However, the meaning of inherent existence has already been briefly explained earlier, but this meaning is not yet clear, so now it is explained more extensively. However, there have been three interpretations since ancient times. The first is the view of Lingwei Baoliang: within Samsara (birth and death) there is already the Dharma (law) of the true spirit, but it has not yet manifested, like obscured gold. The Tathāgatagarbha Sūtra (Buddha-nature Sutra) says: 'It is like a person wrapping a golden statue in tattered cloth and dropping it into the mud, and no one knows about it. Someone with the divine eye picks it up and washes it clean, and then the golden statue appears completely. The true spirit is also like this, originally having the permanent Buddha-body, with all virtues completely present, but covered by afflictions. If afflictions are severed

---

佛體則現也。

次有新安瑤師云：眾生有成佛之道理，此理是常，故說此眾生為正因佛性。此理附於眾生，故說為本有也。

第三、開善具有二義。一者本有，二者始有。更無二體，但將兩義成定之耳。欲明不有神明，定若有神明則本來有當果之理。此本有義，但約萬行圓滿，金剛心謝，種覺起時，名為始有。《大經》具有二文：如貧女寶藏、力士額珠、闇室瓶瓫、井中七寶，本自有此。證本有之文，下《師子吼》及《迦葉品》中皆以乳酪為譬，明乳中無酪，但酪從乳生故言有酪。又云：佛性非三世攝，但眾生未聚莊嚴清凈之身，故說佛性在於未來，此則證始有之文。故知佛性具有兩義：若定木石之流，無成之理，此眾生必應作佛，則本有義；若於佛則今利是因中，因中未有果，則始有義也。

今並不同。

且破第一義：若定本有真神則同僧法；又若因中已有，則同賣乳索酪價、貨草馬索駒直也；又真神力大，何意住煩惱中而不能排煩惱出，而待修道斷惑乃得出耶？

破第二義解：若得佛之理已自是常，則眾生身中已有常住之法，還成常見之執，非真神之法；若此理無常，則不成本有之義。

次破第三開善解具二義：汝言常住之法常有、始有者，亦應常住之法有曾、有今，若有

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 佛的本體是顯現的。 接下來是新安瑤師的觀點：眾生具有成佛的道理，這個道理是永恒不變的，所以說這個眾生具有正因佛性（成為佛的根本原因）。這個道理依附於眾生，所以說是本來就有的。 第三種觀點，開善（人名，或指開善寺）的觀點包含兩種含義：一是本有，二是始有。實際上並沒有兩個不同的本體，只是將這兩種含義結合在一起加以確定罷了。想要說明並非存在一個神明，如果一定要說有神明，那麼本來就應該有得到果報的道理。這屬於本有的含義，但指的是萬行圓滿，金剛心（比喻堅固不壞的求道之心）消逝，覺悟的種子生起的時候，稱之為始有。《大般涅槃經》中包含兩種說法：比如貧女的寶藏、力士額頭上的珠子、黑暗房間里的瓶罐、井中的七寶，這些東西本來就存在。這是證明本有的經文。下文《師子吼品》和《迦葉品》中都用乳酪來比喻，說明牛奶中本來沒有乳酪，但乳酪是從牛奶中產生的，所以說有乳酪。又說：佛性不受過去、現在、未來三世的限制，只是眾生還沒有聚集莊嚴清凈的身體，所以說佛性存在於未來，這是證明始有的經文。所以要知道佛性包含兩種含義：如果確定像木頭石頭之類的東西，沒有成佛的道理，那麼這個眾生必定應該成佛，這就是本有的含義；如果對於佛來說，現在的利益是因中的，因中還沒有果，這就是始有的含義。 現在的觀點和以上這些都不同。 首先駁斥第一種觀點：如果確定本來就存在一個真神，那就和僧伽（佛教僧團）的法則相同了；又如果因中已經存在果，那就如同賣牛奶就索要乳酪的價錢，賣草馬就索要小馬的價錢一樣了；又如果真神的力量很大，為什麼會住在煩惱之中而不能排除煩惱，而要等到修道斷除迷惑才能出來呢？ 駁斥第二種觀點的解釋：如果得到佛的道理就已經自然是永恒不變的，那麼眾生的身體中就已經存在永恒存在的法，反而會形成常見（認為事物永恒不變的錯誤見解）的執著，不是真神的法則；如果這個道理不是永恒不變的，那就不能成立本有的含義。 接下來駁斥第三種開善的解釋，包含兩種含義：你說永恒存在的法有常有、始有，那麼也應該說永恒存在的法有曾經、有現在，如果存在...

【English Translation】 English version: The essence of the Buddha is manifestation. Next, there is the view of Master Yao of Xin'an: Sentient beings have the principle of becoming Buddhas, and this principle is constant. Therefore, it is said that these sentient beings possess the 'correct cause Buddha-nature' (the fundamental cause of becoming a Buddha). This principle is inherent in sentient beings, so it is said to be 'originally existent'. Third, the view of Kaisan (a person's name, or referring to Kaisan Temple) has two meanings: one is 'inherently existent', and the other is 'newly existent'. In reality, there are not two different entities, but rather these two meanings are combined and affirmed. It is intended to explain that there is no such thing as a divine being. If one insists on saying there is a divine being, then there should be the principle of attaining the result from the beginning. This belongs to the meaning of 'inherently existent', but it refers to the time when the myriad practices are perfected, the 'vajra mind' (a metaphor for the firm and indestructible mind of seeking the Way) disappears, and the seed of enlightenment arises, which is called 'newly existent'. The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra contains two statements: for example, the treasure of a poor woman, the pearl on the forehead of a strong man, the bottles and jars in a dark room, and the seven treasures in a well, these things are inherently existent. This is scriptural evidence for 'inherently existent'. The Lion's Roar Chapter and the Kāśyapa Chapter below both use milk and cheese as metaphors, explaining that there is no cheese in milk originally, but cheese is produced from milk, so it is said that there is cheese. It also says: Buddha-nature is not included in the three times (past, present, and future), but sentient beings have not yet gathered a dignified and pure body, so it is said that Buddha-nature exists in the future. This is scriptural evidence for 'newly existent'. Therefore, it should be known that Buddha-nature has two meanings: if it is determined that things like wood and stone have no principle of becoming Buddhas, then these sentient beings must become Buddhas, which is the meaning of 'inherently existent'; if, for a Buddha, the present benefit is in the cause, and there is no result in the cause, then it is the meaning of 'newly existent'. The current view is different from all of these. First, refuting the first view: if it is determined that there is an inherently existent true spirit, then it is the same as the rules of the Sangha (Buddhist monastic community); also, if the result already exists in the cause, then it is like asking for the price of cheese when selling milk, or asking for the price of a foal when selling a grass horse; also, if the power of the true spirit is great, why does it dwell in afflictions and cannot expel afflictions, but must wait until cultivating the Way and cutting off delusions to come out? Refuting the explanation of the second view: if the principle of attaining Buddhahood is already naturally constant, then there is already an eternally existing dharma in the bodies of sentient beings, which would instead form the attachment of 'eternalism' (the mistaken view that things are eternally unchanging), not the dharma of a true spirit; if this principle is not eternally constant, then the meaning of 'inherently existent' cannot be established. Next, refuting the third explanation of Kaisan, which contains two meanings: you say that the eternally existing dharma has 'always existent' and 'newly existent', then it should also be said that the eternally existing dharma has 'once existed' and 'now exists', if there is...

---

曾有今則墮三世，成無常。

反詰云（又難）：若常住之法復有始有之義者，亦應無常之法，應無本有之義；若無常法但有始有，無本有者，則常住法但是本有，無始有也。

又，常住之法具二義者，何因所出？本有之義須了因而出，始有之義復為何所感？若無別因，則應無別有；既有二有，則便兩因，若從生因則無常也。

今明涅槃未曾本，亦不曾始。為破本故始，道始亦為洗，故云本到則顯。道非本始，非本始，並是方便也。

第二、照境用。又二：初照俗境，次明真境。

今先明俗境。

明俗中有流動□法去來，今佛智作，若為照，若逐境，有去來，則佛知無常；若不逐境，境去來，則不與境攝。(弟子決解孝云：境有去來，是□誰心？若約因緣去來，境智亦因緣；去來既因緣，何因果去來與不去來？去則靜，來則動，因緣則智，智則無相。但覺者去來，是相無常。若知無常，境智亦無常，是來有得為疑，且去來相則顛倒，顛倒之境本來所無，何智所知？)

故彭城法師為此難故，明果乃無大期，生滅猶有，唸唸流動，逐境去來。此解不可。故經云：若言如來無常，舌則墮落。此師現世舌爛口中也，彼師尋改悔，作懸高堂。譬如鏡在高堂，萬像現鏡中矣。像有去來

，鏡無生滅，雖作此解，猶在不免難。鏡是無情，知是靈識；又且鏡是無常，云何得譬常住之智？

第二、安師云：知體是常，用則無常，用無常，故逐境去來也。此亦不可。豈得分如來體是無為，用是有為？經云：正見者應說如來定是無為故也。

第三、光宅師作例解如今：以無常之智，照常住之法；而不逐境之智是常。此亦不可！智既不同境常者，亦以常住之智，照無常之境，豈應逐境無常耶？

第四、復有一解作「九照境」義。此智雖照未來，復有當現在、當過去義。我皆照竟，所以不生不滅也。此解不可。明向在未來時是「當現在」，未正現在；今遂成正「現在」，則作「正現在」。照當知息不息耶？若息便為生滅，不息何有此理？當知不息只有「當知」，無現在知也。

第五、作「逆照」義。明如來道成正覺時，一念並逆照竟。后境自去來，知不新知。如天子初登極時，並作製法，後人犯者，隨輕重治之，不復更制，佛智照境亦爾也。此義亦不可。佛智照境，何曾暫息，而言成道時照，后時不照，縱如此，終不與境相拔也。

第六、明「橫豎照」義。明佛在因之月，道初心已能橫照豎照；次入初地則能一念之中橫照百法，豎照百時；乃至二地，於時至佛地，萬法萬時。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 鏡子沒有生滅，即使這樣解釋，仍然不能避免疑問。鏡子是無情的，知覺是靈識；而且鏡子是無常的，怎麼能比喻常住的智慧呢？ 第二種解釋，安法師說：知的本體是常，作用則是無常，因為作用是無常的，所以隨著外境來來去去。這種說法也不對。難道能把如來的本體分為無為，作用分為有為嗎？經書上說：有正見的人應該說如來一定是無為的。 第三種解釋，光宅法師舉例解釋說：用無常的智慧，照見常住的法；不隨外境變化的智慧是常。這種說法也不對！智慧既然與外境不同，外境是常的，那麼用常住的智慧，照見無常的外境，難道應該隨著外境而變得無常嗎？ 第四種解釋，還有一種解釋是『九照境』的含義。這種智慧雖然照見未來，還有當現在、當過去的含義。我都照見了，所以不生不滅。這種解釋不對。明明在未來的時候是『當現在』，還沒有真正成為現在；現在變成了真正的『現在』，那麼照見當知是停止還是不停止呢？如果停止就成了生滅，不停止又有什麼道理？應該知道不停止的只有『當知』，沒有現在的知。 第五種解釋，是『逆照』的含義。說明如來成道的時候，一念之間全部逆照完畢。後來的外境自己來來去去，知覺不會產生新的知。就像天子剛登基的時候，制定好法律，後來有人觸犯，就按照輕重來懲罰，不再重新制定，佛的智慧照見外境也是這樣。這種說法也不對。佛的智慧照見外境，何曾有片刻停止，怎麼能說成道的時候照見，後來就不照見了，即使這樣，最終也不能與外境脫離關係。 第六種解釋，說明『橫豎照』的含義。說明佛在因地的時候，道初心已經能夠橫照豎照；其次進入初地就能在一念之中橫照百法，豎照百時；乃至二地，到佛地，萬法萬時。

【English Translation】 English version: The mirror has no birth or death. Even with this explanation, doubts still remain. A mirror is insentient, while awareness is sentient. Moreover, a mirror is impermanent, so how can it be compared to the constant wisdom? Secondly, Dharma Master An says: The substance of knowledge is constant, while its function is impermanent. Because its function is impermanent, it follows the environment, coming and going. This is also unacceptable. How can we divide the Tathagata's (如來) (one of the titles of a Buddha, meaning 'one who has thus come' or 'one who has thus gone') substance into unconditioned (無為) and its function into conditioned (有為)? The sutra says: One with right view should say that the Tathagata (如來) is definitely unconditioned (無為). Thirdly, Dharma Master Guangzhai explains with an example: Using impermanent wisdom to illuminate the constant Dharma (法) (teachings or laws); the wisdom that does not follow the environment is constant. This is also unacceptable! Since wisdom is different from the environment, and the environment is constant, then using constant wisdom to illuminate the impermanent environment, shouldn't it follow the environment and become impermanent? Fourthly, another explanation is the meaning of 'ninefold illumination of realms' (九照境). Although this wisdom illuminates the future, it also includes the meanings of the present and the past. I have illuminated all of them, so there is no birth or death. This explanation is incorrect. Clearly, in the future it is 'about to be present' (當現在), not yet truly present; now it becomes truly 'present' (現在), then does the illumination of what is about to be known cease or not? If it ceases, then it becomes birth and death; if it does not cease, what is the reason for this? It should be known that only 'about to be known' (當知) exists without present knowledge. Fifthly, the meaning of 'reverse illumination' (逆照). It explains that when the Tathagata (如來) attained enlightenment, in one thought, he completely illuminated everything in reverse. Later, the environments come and go by themselves, and knowledge does not generate new knowledge. Just like when the emperor first ascends the throne, he establishes laws, and later, those who violate them are punished according to the severity of their offenses, without making new laws. The Buddha's wisdom illuminating the environment is also like this. This meaning is also unacceptable. The Buddha's wisdom illuminating the environment, how could it ever cease even for a moment? How can it be said that he illuminated it when he attained enlightenment and does not illuminate it later? Even so, it will never be able to detach itself from the environment. Sixthly, explaining the meaning of 'horizontal and vertical illumination' (橫豎照). It explains that when the Buddha (佛) was in the causal stage (因), the initial mind of the path was already able to illuminate horizontally and vertically; then entering the first ground (初地) he could illuminate a hundred dharmas (百法) horizontally and a hundred times (百時) vertically in one thought; and so on to the second ground (二地), to the Buddha ground (佛地), ten thousand dharmas (萬法) and ten thousand times (萬時).

---

又作虛空譬，物在空中，物有生滅，空無去來。此亦不可。虛空無智，佛果靈智，豈得喻耶？

今明如來智慧，寂絕凝遠。非常無常，能常無常；非生滅非非生滅，能生滅能無生滅。無照而照，照無所照也。

次明真義，但古來有二解。

第一、開善明知照真，即與冥一，無復境智異。所以爾者，智體既妙，湛然常寂，與境不殊，但約德而辨自有三句：一凡夫不冥不會，二因中聖人會而不冥，三者佛果亦冥亦會也。

第二解不同此說，明佛知是靈智之智，真諦是無智之境，兩體既殊，豈可研此有智之法，同無知之境？但會之既極，詺為冥耳，豈得有冥異會耶？

然經中亦有冥會之言，故《慧印三昧經》云：「冥不冥，寂不寂。」《肇論》亦有用冥體寂之語。真體寂滅，言境相定異，豈得言冥言會。

今明境智未曾一，亦復不異。故影師云：「內外並冥，緣智俱寂也。」

次明佛果涅槃發智用。

問：佛果涅槃，為當漸知，為當頓知？古來解不同，舉真諦對明，凡有三說：

一云：二種皆頓知，不可漸見。何者？理既在萬惑之外，雖除一兩分終不見理，要須除或盡理，方可見也。十重紙裹物，除九重終不見，除盡方見。

第二解云：二種皆可漸知。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 　　又用虛空來比喻，物體在空中，有生有滅，但虛空本身沒有來去。這種比喻也是不恰當的。虛空沒有智慧，而佛果的靈智，怎麼能用虛空來比喻呢？ 　　現在闡明如來的智慧，寂靜深遠。它既不是常，也不是無常，能是常也能是無常；既不是生滅，也不是非生滅，能是生滅也能是無生滅。沒有照見而照見，照見而無所照見。 　　接下來闡明真義，但自古以來有兩種解釋。 　　第一種，開善（指開善寺，此處指開善寺的觀點）認為知照即是真，與冥合為一，不再有境（客觀世界）和智（主觀智慧）的差別。之所以這樣認為，是因為智慧的本體精妙，湛然常寂，與境沒有區別，只是從功德的角度來區分，自有三種狀態：一是凡夫不冥合也不會悟會，二是因地中的聖人會悟而不冥合，三是佛果既冥合又會悟。 　　第二種解釋與此不同，認為佛的知是靈智之智，真諦是無智之境，兩者本體既然不同，怎麼能研究這有智之法，等同於無知之境呢？只是會悟到了極點，稱之為冥合罷了，哪裡會有冥合、差異和會悟呢？ 　　然而經中也有冥合之說，所以《慧印三昧經》說：『冥而不冥，寂而不寂。』《肇論》也有用冥來體現寂滅本體的說法。真如本體寂滅，如果說境和相是截然不同的，又怎麼能說冥合和會悟呢？ 　　現在闡明境和智未曾是一，也未曾不是一。所以影師（指慧影）說：『內外都冥合，緣和智都寂滅。』 　　接下來闡明佛果涅槃時發智的作用。 　　問：佛果涅槃，是逐漸了知，還是頓悟了知？古來的解釋不同，用真諦來對比說明，大致有三種說法： 　　一種說法認為：兩種都是頓悟了知，不可能逐漸了見。為什麼呢？因為真理既然在萬惑之外，即使去除一兩分迷惑，終究不能見到真理，必須去除所有迷惑，才能見到真理。就像十層紙包裹的物體，去除九層終究不能見到，必須全部去除才能見到。 　　第二種解釋認為：兩種都可以逐漸了知。

【English Translation】 English version: Furthermore, it's like using the analogy of empty space. Objects exist in space, having birth and death, but space itself doesn't come or go. This is also inappropriate. Empty space has no wisdom, so how can the spiritual wisdom of the Buddha-fruit (Buddha-phala) be compared to it? Now, I will explain the Tathagata's (Tathagata) wisdom, which is tranquil and profound. It is neither permanent nor impermanent; it can be permanent and can be impermanent. It is neither arising nor ceasing, nor non-arising and non-ceasing; it can arise and cease, and can be without arising and ceasing. It illuminates without illuminating, illuminating without anything to illuminate. Next, I will explain the true meaning, but there have been two interpretations since ancient times. The first, Kaisan (Kaisan, referring to Kaisan Temple, here referring to the viewpoint of Kaisan Temple) clarifies that knowing and illuminating is truth, merging into oneness, with no difference between the realm (objective world) and wisdom (subjective wisdom). The reason for this is that the essence of wisdom is subtle, serene, and always tranquil, not different from the realm. It is only distinguished from the perspective of merit, with three states: first, ordinary people neither merge nor comprehend; second, sages in the causal stage comprehend but do not merge; and third, the Buddha-fruit both merges and comprehends. The second interpretation differs, stating that the Buddha's knowledge is the wisdom of spiritual intelligence, and the true essence is the realm of no-wisdom. Since the two entities are different, how can one study this method of having wisdom and equate it with the realm of no-knowledge? It is only when comprehension reaches its peak that it is called merging; how can there be merging, difference, and comprehension? However, there are also statements of merging in the scriptures, so the 'Wisdom Seal Samadhi Sutra' ('Huiyin Sanmei Jing') says: 'Merging without merging, tranquility without tranquility.' The 'Zhao Lun' also uses the term 'merging' to embody the essence of tranquility. If the true essence is tranquil and extinct, and if the realm and form are said to be completely different, how can one speak of merging and comprehension? Now, I clarify that the realm and wisdom have never been one, nor have they not been one. Therefore, the Shadow Master (Huiying) says: 'Both inside and outside merge, and both conditions and wisdom are extinguished.' Next, I will explain the function of wisdom arising from the Buddha-fruit Nirvana (Nirvana). Question: In the Buddha-fruit Nirvana, is it known gradually or known suddenly? Ancient interpretations differ, using the true essence for comparison, with roughly three views: One view is that both are known suddenly, and cannot be seen gradually. Why? Because since truth is outside of all delusions, even if one or two delusions are removed, truth cannot be seen. One must remove all delusions to see truth. Like an object wrapped in ten layers of paper, removing nine layers will not reveal the object; all must be removed to see it. The second interpretation is that both can be known gradually.

---

故《漸備經》明一切智慧，皆漸漸滿足，豈可一朝並悟耶？

第三解云：佛果可頓得，真諦可得漸知。所以爾者，真諦即俗之空，更非遠物，所以得智慧即可分知；佛果智出生死之外，所以不可漸知。

今謂此之解皆不可。初云皆頓知不可者，汝既都未見理，亦應都未斷惑，若少分斷惑，則應少分見理；又且不見理則無智慧，無智慧以何除惑耶？

次皆漸知不可者，明理。若有分可得分知，理既通同無分，那可分知；又責初地見真，為已稱理，為不稱理？若已稱理，與二地何異？若未稱理，何謂見理？

第三傢俱招二難，又且二語自相反，故不可。

今明至理尚無頓漸，豈有頓漸之知？雖無頓漸，亦頓亦漸。故經云：發心畢竟，二不別。《華嚴》云：初心菩薩與三世佛等，而復有漸漸知義，有五十二地不同，初地百法，二地千法故也。

第六、總問答料簡。

此涅槃有三本，雙卷大千本及六卷。說者不同，有雙卷是小乘經，二是大乘。或云：同座異聞故，廣略差別也。有云翻有廣略，多應爾。法顯得大本上帙，翻為六卷故也。

涅槃經游意(終)

道融先於江南會稽遊學，聞彼大德等云：其吉藏法師《涅槃疏記》等，百濟僧並將歸鄉，所以此間無本留行。道

【現代漢語翻譯】 因此，《漸備經》（Jian Bei Jing）闡明一切智慧都是逐漸圓滿的，怎麼可能一朝頓悟呢？

第三種解釋是：佛果可以頓悟而得，真諦可以逐漸瞭解。為什麼這麼說呢？因為真諦就是世俗的空性，並非遙遠之物，所以獲得智慧就可以逐漸瞭解；佛果之智超越生死之外，所以不可能逐漸瞭解。

現在我認為這些解釋都不可取。首先說都頓悟不可能，你既然完全沒有見到真理，也應該完全沒有斷除迷惑。如果少分斷除迷惑，就應該少分見到真理；而且不見真理就沒有智慧，沒有智慧用什麼來去除迷惑呢？

其次說都漸悟不可能，要明白道理。如果有一部分可以逐漸瞭解，道理既然是貫通而沒有分別的，怎麼可以分割了解呢？再問，初地菩薩見到真諦，是已經符合真理，還是不符合真理？如果已經符合真理，與二地菩薩有什麼區別？如果還沒有符合真理，那又算什麼見到真理呢？

第三種說法兼具兩種難點，而且兩種說法自相矛盾，所以不可取。

現在闡明至高的真理本來就沒有頓悟和漸悟的區別，哪裡會有頓悟和漸悟的瞭解呢？雖然沒有頓悟和漸悟的區別，也包含頓悟和漸悟的含義。所以經書上說：發心和最終的證悟，二者沒有差別。《華嚴經》（Hua Yan Jing）說：初發心的菩薩與三世諸佛相等，但又有逐漸瞭解的含義，有五十二個階位的不同，初地菩薩瞭解一百種法，二地菩薩瞭解一千種法。

第六、總的問答和辨析。

這部《涅槃經》（Nirvana Sutra）有三個版本，雙卷的大千本和六卷本。說法不同，有的說雙卷本是小乘經典，六卷本是大乘經典。或者說：因為在同一個座位聽法，聽眾理解的廣略不同。也有人說翻譯有廣略之分，多半是這樣。法顯（Fa Xian）得到大本的上半部分，翻譯成了六卷本。

《涅槃經游意》（Nirvana Sutra You Yi）(終)

道融（Dao Rong）先前在江南會稽遊學，聽到當地的大德們說：吉藏法師（Ji Zang）的《涅槃疏記》（Nirvana Sutra Commentary）等著作，被百濟的僧人帶回了家鄉，所以這裡沒有版本流傳。

【English Translation】 Therefore, the 'Jian Bei Jing' (Sutra of Gradual Completion) clarifies that all wisdom is gradually fulfilled. How can one attain enlightenment in a single day?

The third explanation is: Buddhahood can be attained suddenly, while the ultimate truth can be understood gradually. Why is this so? Because the ultimate truth is the emptiness of the mundane, not something distant. Therefore, gaining wisdom allows for gradual understanding. The wisdom of Buddhahood transcends birth and death, so it cannot be understood gradually.

Now, I believe that these explanations are all unacceptable. Firstly, saying that sudden enlightenment is impossible: since you have not seen the truth at all, you should not have eliminated delusion at all. If you have eliminated delusion in a small part, you should have seen the truth in a small part. Moreover, without seeing the truth, there is no wisdom. Without wisdom, what can you use to remove delusion?

Secondly, saying that gradual enlightenment is impossible: understand the principle. If a part can be understood gradually, since the principle is interconnected and without division, how can it be understood in parts? Furthermore, ask whether the first Bhumi (stage of Bodhisattva) seeing the truth is in accordance with the principle or not? If it is already in accordance with the principle, what is the difference from the second Bhumi? If it is not yet in accordance with the principle, what does it mean to see the truth?

The third statement has both difficulties and the two statements contradict each other, so it is unacceptable.

Now, it is clarified that the ultimate truth originally has no distinction between sudden and gradual, so how can there be sudden and gradual understanding? Although there is no sudden and gradual, it also includes both sudden and gradual. Therefore, the sutra says: 'The initial aspiration and the ultimate enlightenment are not different.' The 'Hua Yan Jing' (Avatamsaka Sutra) says: 'The Bodhisattva of initial aspiration is equal to the Buddhas of the three times,' but there is also the meaning of gradual understanding, with the difference of the fifty-two Bhumis. The Bodhisattva of the first Bhumi understands one hundred dharmas, and the Bodhisattva of the second Bhumi understands one thousand dharmas.

Sixth, general questions and answers for analysis.

This 'Nirvana Sutra' has three versions: the two-volume Da Qian Ben (Greater Thousand Version) and the six-volume version. The explanations differ. Some say that the two-volume version is a Hinayana (Small Vehicle) scripture, and the six-volume version is a Mahayana (Great Vehicle) scripture. Others say: because they listened to the Dharma in the same seat, the understanding of the audience varied in breadth and detail. Some also say that the translation has differences in breadth and detail, which is likely the case. Fa Xian obtained the upper part of the greater version and translated it into the six-volume version.

'Nirvana Sutra You Yi' (Wandering Thoughts on the Nirvana Sutra) (End)

Dao Rong previously studied in Kuaiji (present-day Shaoxing, Zhejiang) in Jiangnan (south of the Yangtze River), and heard from the local virtuous monks that the 'Nirvana Sutra Commentary' and other works by Dharma Master Ji Zang were taken back to their homeland by monks from Baekje (ancient Korean kingdom), so there were no copies circulating here.

---

融　《京感亭》曰：年過見百濟，賢者持此吉藏法師《涅槃玄意》，行故鄉寫之二，有疏，而未得讀，乃寫其，賢者在彼訓。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 融在《京感亭》中寫道：『年紀大了才見到百濟，賢者拿著吉藏法師（Jizang Fashi，人名，三論宗集大成者）的《涅槃玄意》（Nirvana Xuanyi，佛教著作名），在故鄉抄寫了兩份，有疏文，但還沒能讀到，於是抄寫了它，賢者在那裡訓導。』

【English Translation】 English version: Rong, in 'Kyonggam Pavilion', wrote: 'Having aged, I finally saw Baekje. A wise man held Master Jizang's (Jizang Fashi, a person's name, the synthesizer of the Three Treatise School) 'Profound Meaning of Nirvana Sutra' (Nirvana Xuanyi, name of a Buddhist text), and copied it twice in his hometown. There was a commentary, but I haven't been able to read it yet, so I copied it. The wise man instructs there.'

---