Chinese
大正藏第 26 册 No. 1528 涅槃经本有今无偈论 No. 1528 涅槃经本有今无偈论一卷 天亲菩萨造 陈世真谛三藏于广州译 涅槃经三世义 解纯陀疑问。论曰：多弟子已成熟，纯陀未成熟，佛为纯陀未成熟故，显示大般涅槃，讲说大经，受大功德，为成熟故来拘尸那城。云何纯陀而有疑心？有二因缘：一、见同相未见别相生疑心；二见别相不见同相故。起疑心者，如遥见杌，疑为是人、为是杌？若见乌鸟集上，鹿从其下过，知是杌非人；若见举手挑衣者，知人非杌。别相不见同相生疑心者，如空不共相是常住，如见地不共相是无常。声闻者不共相，于声闻不共相生疑，为同空是常住、为同地是无常？凡夫为同相故起疑心，声闻缘觉为别相故起疑心。凡夫为有生法故起疑心，声闻缘觉为无生法故起疑心。纯陀不为此二种故起疑心，为欲利益众生故生此疑。如此大菩萨，那得于佛生疑？于此大会大有外道聚集，有外道说佛死而更生，复有说如灯尽火灭，复有说佛灭后有尽有不尽。为释此疑故，佛说偈： “本有今无， 本无今有， 三世有法， 无有是处。” 佛为二乘故说偈。烦恼生得，圣修得。凡夫性生得，圣性修得。烦恼 现代汉语译本 《涅槃经本有今无偈论》一卷 天亲（Vasubandhu）菩萨造 陈世真谛三藏于广州译 涅槃经三世义 解释纯陀（Cunda）的疑问。论曰：多数弟子已经成熟，纯陀尚未成熟，佛为了纯陀这些尚未成熟的众生，显示大般涅槃（Mahaparinirvana），讲说大经，接受大功德，为了度化他们来到拘尸那揭罗（Kushinagar）。为什么纯陀会有疑心呢？有两个原因：一、见到相似之处，未见到不同之处，因而产生疑心；二、见到不同之处，未见到相似之处。产生疑心的情况，就像远远地看见树桩，怀疑是人还是树桩？如果看见乌鸦停在上面，鹿从下面经过，就知道是树桩不是人；如果看见举手挑衣服的人，就知道是人不是树桩。因为不同之处而未见相同之处产生疑心的情况，比如虚空的无共相是常住的，如同见到大地的无共相是无常的。声闻（Śrāvaka）的不共相，对于声闻的不共相产生怀疑，是同虚空一样是常住的，还是同大地一样是无常的？凡夫因为相同之处而产生疑心，声闻缘觉（Pratyekabuddha）因为不同之处而产生疑心。凡夫因为有生法而产生疑心，声闻缘觉因为无生法而产生疑心。纯陀不是因为这两种原因而产生疑心，而是为了利益众生才产生此疑问。像这样的大菩萨，怎么会对佛产生怀疑呢？因为这次大会聚集了很多外道，有的外道说佛死后还会再生，有的说像灯熄灭一样，有的说佛灭度后，有的会消失，有的不会消失。为了解释这些疑惑，佛说了偈颂： ‘本有今无， 本无今有， 三世有法， 无有是处。’ 佛是为了声闻、缘觉二乘而说此偈。烦恼是生来就有的，圣性是修习而得的。凡夫的本性是生来就有的，圣人的本性是修习而得的。烦恼
English
English version Nirvana Sutra: A Treatise on 'Originally Existent, Now Non-Existent' - One Scroll Composed by Bodhisattva Vasubandhu Translated in Guangzhou by Tripiṭaka Paramārtha of the Chen Dynasty The Meaning of the Three Times in the Nirvana Sutra Explaining Cunda's doubts. The treatise says: Most disciples are already mature, but Cunda is not yet mature. For the sake of those immature like Cunda, the Buddha reveals the Mahaparinirvana, expounds the great sutra, and receives great merit, coming to Kushinagar to mature them. Why does Cunda have doubts? There are two reasons: first, seeing similarities but not seeing differences, thus giving rise to doubt; second, seeing differences but not seeing similarities. The arising of doubt is like seeing a tree stump from afar, wondering if it is a person or a stump. If one sees crows gathering on it and deer passing beneath it, one knows it is a stump and not a person; if one sees someone raising a hand to adjust their clothing, one knows it is a person and not a stump. The arising of doubt due to seeing differences but not seeing similarities is like the non-common characteristic of space being permanent, while seeing the non-common characteristic of earth being impermanent. The non-common characteristic of the Śrāvakas, gives rise to doubt about the non-common characteristic of the Śrāvakas, is it permanent like space, or impermanent like earth? Ordinary people give rise to doubt because of similarities, while Śrāvakas and Pratyekabuddhas give rise to doubt because of differences. Ordinary people give rise to doubt because of conditioned existence, while Śrāvakas and Pratyekabuddhas give rise to doubt because of unconditioned existence. Cunda does not give rise to doubt for these two reasons, but rather generates this doubt to benefit sentient beings. How could such a great Bodhisattva doubt the Buddha? Because many non-Buddhists gathered at this assembly, some of whom said that the Buddha would be reborn after death, others said it was like a lamp extinguishing, and still others said that after the Buddha's extinction, some things would disappear and some would not. To resolve these doubts, the Buddha spoke this verse: 'Originally existent, now non-existent, Originally non-existent, now existent, The law of the three times, There is no such place.' The Buddha spoke this verse for the sake of the two vehicles of Śrāvakas and Pratyekabuddhas. Afflictions are innate, while saintly qualities are acquired through cultivation. The nature of ordinary people is innate, while the nature of saints is acquired through cultivation. Afflictions --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
缚生得，解缚修得。生死生得，涅槃修得。本生今修，本是生、今是修。为二乘作此解说不谤大乘，为大乘作此解说是谤大乘。此是不相应大乘，谁能令相应大乘？是故我等依义选择思惟义，不依语言不选择思惟语言，为修行大乘者说。过三种义，显了别义，言本有今无、本无今有、三时有。是三种义无有，无有是处。何故三种义不成就？若本有今无者，一切如来等则无解脱。何以故？性不定住故，以前有后无故。一切真有亦无，真有俗有亦无。何以故？真有前后无异故，俗有无本故，是故真俗二义不成就。于此二义不明了，僧佉外道亦如是说因中有果，譬如乳有酪生酥等，是增益僧佉等义。若本无碍，现在时中谁能为障？若汝思惟妨碍因缘和合为障者，是义不然。何以故？前后无异故。若今不障，本时何故不障？有何道理，本不依因缘生，后依那因缘灭？所言本者，以何法为本？为初起、为当相续为本？若初起为本，初不为因缘所生，后如初亦不为因缘所生。若如是，说十二因缘法如如义，皆悉已破，则同外道说无因义。若相续为本者，相续亦不定。何以故？分分不定故。云何相续为本？是故一切有生之法，说本无因。如此说者则无道理。本无今有者，若前是无本而今有，有者则无得解脱者，前烦恼未起则是离解脱 现代汉语译本 缚是与生俱来的，解脱是修习而得的。（缚：束缚，指烦恼） 生死是与生俱来的，涅槃是修习而得的。（生死：轮回，涅槃：解脱） 根本是生，现在是修。如果为二乘（声闻乘和缘觉乘）这样解释，就不算诽谤大乘（菩萨乘）；如果为大乘这样解释，就是诽谤大乘。这是不相应的大乘，谁能使之成为相应的大乘呢？ 因此，我们依循意义来选择和思惟，而不是依循语言来选择和思惟，为修行大乘的人宣说。 超越三种意义，显现出特别的意义，即说本来有现在无、本来无现在有、以及三时（过去、现在、未来）皆有。这三种意义都是没有的，不存在这样的道理。 为什么这三种意义不能成立呢？如果本来有现在无，那么一切如来等就没有解脱。为什么呢？因为自性不是恒常不变的，因为之前有之后就没有了。一切真实存在也是没有的，真实存在和世俗存在也是没有的。为什么呢？因为真实存在前后没有差别，世俗存在没有根本，所以真实和世俗这两种意义都不能成立。 对于这两种意义不明白，僧佉外道（古印度数论派）也是这样说，认为因中含有果，譬如牛奶中含有酪和生酥等，这是增益僧佉等的意义。 如果本来没有障碍，那么现在的时候谁能成为障碍呢？如果你认为妨碍的因缘和合成为障碍，这个说法是不对的。为什么呢？因为前后没有差别。如果现在不成为障碍，那么本来的时候为什么不成为障碍？有什么道理，本来不依靠因缘而生，后来依靠那个因缘而灭？ 所说的‘本’，是以什么法作为‘本’呢？是最初生起，还是当下的相续作为‘本’呢？如果以最初生起作为‘本’，最初不是因缘所生，那么后来也像最初一样不是因缘所生。如果这样，那么所说的十二因缘法（无明、行、识、名色、六入、触、受、爱、取、有、生、老死）的如如之义，就全部被破坏了，那就等同于外道所说的无因论。 如果以相续作为‘本’，相续也是不定的。为什么呢？因为分分都是不定的。怎么能以相续作为‘本’呢？所以一切有生之法，都说是本来没有原因的。这样说就没有道理了。 本来没有现在有，如果之前是无本而现在有，那么有者就没有得到解脱的人，前烦恼未起则是离解脱
English
English version Bondage is inherent at birth, liberation is attained through practice. (Bondage: refers to afflictions) Birth and death are inherent at birth, Nirvana is attained through practice. (Birth and death: Samsara, Nirvana: liberation) 'Fundamentally, it is birth; now, it is practice.' To explain it this way for the Two Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna) is not to slander the Mahayana (Bodhisattvayāna); to explain it this way for the Mahayana is to slander the Mahayana. This is the non-corresponding Mahayana; who can make it the corresponding Mahayana? Therefore, we rely on meaning to select and contemplate meaning, not relying on language to select and contemplate language, speaking for those who practice the Mahayana. Transcending three meanings, revealing a distinct meaning, namely, saying 'originally existent, now non-existent,' 'originally non-existent, now existent,' and 'existent in three times (past, present, future).' These three meanings are all non-existent; there is no such reason. Why are these three meanings not established? If 'originally existent, now non-existent,' then all Tathagatas (如来) and others would have no liberation. Why? Because the nature is not constant, because it was existent before and non-existent later. All truly existent is also non-existent; truly existent and conventionally existent are also non-existent. Why? Because truly existent has no difference before and after, conventionally existent has no root, therefore the two meanings of truly and conventionally are not established. Not understanding these two meanings, the Samkhya (僧佉) heretics (an ancient Indian school of thought) also say the same, believing that the effect is contained within the cause, like butter and ghee arising from milk, which is the meaning of increasing Samkhya and others. If there was originally no obstruction, then who can become an obstruction in the present time? If you think that the aggregation of obstructing causes and conditions becomes an obstruction, this statement is not correct. Why? Because there is no difference before and after. If it does not become an obstruction now, then why did it not become an obstruction originally? What is the reason that it originally did not arise relying on causes and conditions, and later ceased relying on those causes and conditions? What is meant by 'original'? What dharma (法) is taken as 'original'? Is it the initial arising, or the present continuity that is taken as 'original'? If the initial arising is taken as 'original,' the initial is not produced by causes and conditions, then later it is also not produced by causes and conditions like the initial. If so, then the suchness meaning of the Twelve Links of Dependent Origination (十二因缘法) (ignorance, action, consciousness, name and form, the six entrances, contact, feeling, craving, grasping, becoming, birth, old age and death) is completely destroyed, which is equivalent to the doctrine of no cause as taught by the heretics. If continuity is taken as 'original,' continuity is also uncertain. Why? Because each part is uncertain. How can continuity be taken as 'original'? Therefore, all dharmas that have arising are said to have no original cause. Saying this is unreasonable. Originally non-existent, now existent; if previously there was no root but now there is existence, then those who exist have not attained liberation, before afflictions arise, then it is apart from liberation. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
，而后生烦恼则无解脱。若前无今有者，最极无生当应得生，如空生花。若汝思惟一则无因。是义不然。何以故？如屋与花，二同是未有，何故因缘生屋、不因缘生花？等是无故。是义无道理。若本无生而今得生，则破本义。是义不然。何以故？初生是本故。若汝思惟因缘，是初生则非初，是故生非是本。是亦不然。何以故？汝意欲破本有故，欲立因缘本者。是故不过本故，前未有法因云何生？若其生者为具足生、为分分生？若具足生者，为一时生、为前后生？若一时生，则因果同时不可分别。若果后生，因在前灭，谁生后果？如煮熟鸡而复作声还生。若具足者，何用观因？若分分生者，亦同前失。是故本无今有，欲安立因，是义不然。 三时有者，无有是义。若有是三世者，为一义遍三世、为一一义各各三世？如此二义并皆不然。何以故？若一义遍三世者，不得一世有三。何以故？相妨碍故。若义依时，则过去未来分分无穷。若时依义，义一故则无三世。离义故则无别时，是故三时皆不成就。若一物遍三世者，是物则不可说名。何以故？一物二成就故，若尔生死涅槃则是一。若各各世有者，三世各自有，如现世能生果，过去未来何意不能生？若具能生，则无一人得解脱者。若不能生过去未来，谁断果报？言过 现代汉语译本：如果先前没有（烦恼），之后才产生烦恼，那就无法解脱。如果先前没有而现在有，那么最极无生之法应当能够产生，就像空中生花一样。如果你认为‘一’（指烦恼的生起）没有原因，这种说法是不对的。为什么呢？就像房屋和花朵，两者都是先前没有的，为什么因缘能够产生房屋，却不能产生花朵呢？都是没有的缘故，这种说法没有道理。如果原本没有生而现在能够生，那就破坏了原本的定义。这种说法是不对的。为什么呢？最初的生就是根本的缘故。如果你认为因缘是最初的生，那么就不是最初的，所以生不是根本。这种说法也是不对的。为什么呢？你想要破除原本就有的，想要建立因缘是根本的。所以无法超越根本，先前没有的法，因缘如何产生呢？如果产生，是完全具足地产生，还是分部分地产生？如果是完全具足地产生，是一时产生，还是前后产生？如果一时产生，那么因和果同时，无法分别。如果果在后产生，因在前灭亡，谁来产生后果呢？就像煮熟的鸡又发出声音，重新产生一样。如果是完全具足的，那又何必观察因缘呢？如果是分部分地产生，也和前面的过失一样。所以，原本没有而现在有，想要安立因缘，这种说法是不对的。 三时（过去、现在、未来）有，这种说法是不对的。如果存在三世，是一义遍及三世，还是每一义各自存在于三世？这两种说法都不对。为什么呢？如果一义遍及三世，那么一世就不能有三。为什么呢？因为互相妨碍的缘故。如果义依存于时间，那么过去和未来就会分分无穷。如果时间依存于义，义是唯一的，那么就没有三世。离开义就没有别的时间，所以三时都不能成立。如果一物遍及三世，那么这个事物就无法被称说。为什么呢？因为一物同时成就两种状态，如果是这样，生死和涅槃就是一样的。如果各世各自存在，三世各自有，就像现世能够产生果，过去和未来为什么不能产生？如果都能够产生，那么就没有一个人能够解脱。如果过去和未来不能产生，谁来断绝果报？说过去