清淨道論 集諦・滅諦與涅槃之論Visuddhimagga · The Truth of Origin, the Truth of Cessation, and the Discussion of Nibbāna
集諦是「於彼彼而歡喜」的渴愛：不論生在哪裡，它都能就地歡喜、就地紮根。所以滅諦的定型句說的不是苦之滅，是渴愛之滅——樹根未拔，樹砍倒了還會再生。諸如來行處同師子：滅苦於因行道；諸外道行處同狗：於果行道。狗逐杖，師子逐擲杖的人。
涅槃是不是「什麼都沒有」？七輪答難逐一拆掉這個讀法：不可得，是愚凡夫不得，非其無有；若涅槃是無，行道就空無果、聖道就無用；「盡」是事件，涅槃是盡的所依——把事件當終點，涅槃就塌成有為，會被諸火所燒。
道不製造涅槃，道抵達涅槃——應得，非所生。無出生故無老死，故常；諸佛究竟無別，唯一究竟。有餘依無餘依，分的是施設之所依，不是涅槃有二。
四個否定圈出一個實有：「比丘們啊，有不生、不成、不作、無為。」微細到唯聖眼可見；方便上，循道可得。
The truth of origin is the craving that is “delighting here and there”: wherever one is born, it can delight on the spot and take root on the spot. Hence the set formula of the truth of cessation speaks not of the cessation of suffering but of the cessation of craving—when the root is not pulled up, a tree cut down grows again. The Tathāgatas behave like lions: they end suffering by working on the cause; the outsiders behave like dogs: they work on the fruit. The dog chases the stick; the lion goes for the one who threw it.
Is nibbāna “nothing at all”? Seven rounds of debate take this reading apart piece by piece: undiscoverable means the foolish ordinary person does not discover it, not that it does not exist; if nibbāna were non-existence, the way of practice would be fruitless and the noble path useless; “destruction” is an event, and nibbāna is what the destruction rests on—treat the event as the terminus and nibbāna collapses into the conditioned, to be burned by the fires.
The path does not manufacture nibbāna; the path arrives at nibbāna—to be attained, not produced. Unoriginated, hence without aging and death, hence permanent; the consummation of the Buddhas has no distinction, one consummation only. With residue remaining and without residue remaining distinguish the basis of the designation, not a twofold nibbāna.
Four negations fence in one reality: “Bhikkhus, there is the unborn, the unbecome, the unmade, the unconditioned.” Subtle to the point of being visible only to the noble eye; by means, attainable along the path.
本單元白話為本編自巴利原典之譯疏（tr. mine）；底本事項詳本單元考據。
§1 集諦之釋——渴愛四語與三愛 〔CSCD §553〕
集之解釋之說
而於集之解釋中：「凡是這渴愛」，就是這個渴愛。「能引後有者」——作後有¹的，就是後有；以後有為其常習，所以是能引後有者。「與歡喜及貪俱」，就是與歡喜及貪俱者；意思是說：它與歡喜及貪就義而言已成為一。「於彼彼而歡喜者」——自體在何處何處生起，就在何處何處歡喜。「謂如」是不變詞，它的意思是「那是哪些呢」。「欲愛、有愛、無有愛」——這些將在緣起之解釋中明說。而應當知道：在這裡，這三種〔愛〕由於令苦諦生起之義而被合為一，才說為「苦集聖諦」。
這是集之解釋中的方法。
§2 何以以集滅說滅·樹根之偈·師子與狗 〔CSCD §554〕
滅之解釋之說
若說：於苦滅之解釋中，以「凡是那同一渴愛的」等等的方式所說的是集之滅，那是為什麼呢？——由集之滅而有苦之滅。因為苦唯由集之滅而滅，不由別的。所以說：
「正如樹根未受損害而堅固時，／樹雖被砍倒也還會再生；／同樣地，渴愛之隨眠²未被拔除時，／這苦也就一再地生起。」
這樣，因為苦唯由集之滅而滅，所以世尊在宣說苦滅的時候，也就唯以集之滅來宣說。因為諸如來的行處與師子相同。祂們在滅苦、在宣說苦滅的時候，是於因而行道，不於果。而諸外道的行處則與狗相同。他們在滅苦、在宣說苦滅的時候，以自苦之勤修之說等等而於果行道，不於因。這樣就先應當知道以集之滅來宣說苦滅的用意。
§3 滅諦諸語之義與涅槃之相味現起 〔CSCD §555–556〕
而這是它的義：「凡是那同一渴愛的」——就是那已說為「能引後有者」而依欲愛等等而分別了的渴愛的。「離貪」是說道，因為說過「由離貪而解脫」。由離貪而滅，就是離貪之滅。由於隨眠之根除而無餘的離貪之滅，就是無餘離貪之滅。或者，「離貪」是說斷；所以應當知道這裡也可以這樣連結：無餘之離貪即無餘之滅。而就義而言，這一切都是涅槃的異名³。因為就第一義而言，「苦滅聖諦」是說涅槃。而因為緣於它，渴愛既離貪也滅，所以說它是離貪、是滅。又因為唯緣於它才有那〔渴愛〕的捨等等，而且在它之中對五種欲功德的執著⁴連一個也沒有，所以說它是「捨、捨遣、解脫、無執著」。
而這〔涅槃〕以寂靜為相，以不死為味——或以作安慰為味；以無相為現起——或以無戲論為現起。
§4 涅槃非無之論——不可得與行道不空 〔CSCD §557–558〕
涅槃之說
若說：涅槃根本沒有，因為它像兔角一樣不可得——不然，因為它以方便而可得。因為它以名為相應之行道的方便而可得，如以他心智⁵而〔知〕他人的出世間心一般；所以不應當說「因為不可得所以沒有」。因為不應當說「凡是愚凡夫所不得的，那就沒有」。
而且不應當說涅槃沒有。為什麼呢？因為〔那樣的話〕行道就成為空無果的。因為若沒有涅槃，那麼以正見為前導的、為戒等三蘊所攝的正行道就成為空無果的；而它並不是空無果的，因為它能令至於涅槃。
若說：行道並不成為空無果，因為它能令至於「無」——不然，因為在過去與未來之無中並沒有涅槃之得。
若說：現在諸法之無也就是涅槃——不然，因為它們的無不可能；而且若〔它們〕無，就成為非現在；而且在依於現在諸蘊的道之剎那有有餘依涅槃界⁶之生起，〔說它是無〕就有過失。
若說：那時因為諸煩惱非現在，所以沒有過失——不然，因為〔那樣的話〕聖道就成為無用。因為若是這樣，那麼在聖道剎那之前諸煩惱也不存在，於是聖道就成為無用。所以這不成理由。
§5 「盡即涅槃」之破 〔CSCD §559〕
若說：由於有「賢友啊，凡是貪之盡」等等的說法，所以「盡就是涅槃」——不然，因為〔那樣的話〕阿羅漢果也就成為唯是盡而已。因為它也是以「賢友啊，凡是貪之盡」等等的方式而指示的。更何況〔那樣的話〕涅槃就有成為暫時等等的過失。因為若是這樣，涅槃就成為暫時的、有為之相的、不待正精進而可得的；而且正因為是有為之相，就成為有為所攝；因為是有為所攝，就成為被貪等等諸火所燒；因為被燒，也就成為苦。
若說：因為從盡以後不再有所謂的轉起，那〔不轉起〕就是涅槃，所以沒有過失——不然，因為並沒有那樣的盡；而且即使有它，也不能超出上面所說的種種過失；而且聖道也就成為涅槃了。因為聖道令諸過失盡，所以說它是盡；而且從此以後諸過失不再轉起。
而由於涅槃就方便而言是那名為不生之滅的盡的親依止⁷，所以就以「它是誰的親依止」這樣的假名而說為「盡」。
若說：那為什麼不以它自身之相而說呢——因為極微細。而它的極微細，由於它招致世尊的無意樂〔說法〕，又由於它是為聖眼所應見的，所以得以成立。
§6 涅槃之德——不共無始常·有餘無餘 〔CSCD §560–561〕
而這〔涅槃〕由於是具道者所應得的，所以不共；由於沒有前際，所以無出生。
若說：由於道有時它才有，所以並非無出生——不然，因為它不是道所能生的。因為它唯是道所應得的，不是所應生的。所以正是無出生。由於無出生，所以無老死。由於沒有出生、老、死，所以是常。
若說：如涅槃一樣，極微等等也就成為常了——不然，因為沒有理由。若說：由於涅槃是常，所以它們也是常——不然，因為因之相不成立。若說：它們由於沒有生起等等而為常，就像涅槃一樣——不然，因為極微等等本身並不成立。
而由於有如上所說之理，所以唯有這〔涅槃〕是常；由於超越色之自性，所以是無色。由於諸佛等等的究竟並無差別，所以唯是一究竟。凡由修習而得它的人，就其煩惱之寂止與依之餘而可施設，由於是連同依之餘而被施設的，所以是有餘依。而由於斷了集而使未來業果已壞的人，在最後心之後不再生起轉起的諸蘊、已生起的也隱沒，因而有依之餘的沒有；就其〔依之餘的沒有〕而可施設，所以說「這裡沒有依之餘」，因此是無餘依。
由於它是以不緩之勇猛所成就的智之殊勝而可證得的，又由於有一切知者之語，所以涅槃就第一義而言，依自性並非不存在。因為說過這個：「比丘們啊，有不生、不成、不作、無為。」
這是苦滅之解釋中決擇之說之門。
註
¹ 後有（punabbhava）：於此生之後更受之有；渴愛以作後有為其常習，故稱能引後有者。
² 隨眠（anusaya）：潛伏而未現行的煩惱；此偈以樹根未拔喻渴愛之隨眠未斷。
³ 異名（vevacana）：同一事之別名；滅諦定型句之諸語就義而言皆是涅槃之異名。
⁴ 五種欲功德之執著（kāmaguṇālaya）：對色、聲、香、味、觸五種欲境的執著；本論以其於涅槃中一無所有而釋「無執著」一語。
⁵ 他心智（cetopariyañāṇa）：知他人心之智；本論以之為「不可見而以方便可得」的例。
⁶ 有餘依涅槃界（sopādisesanibbānadhātu）：就煩惱已寂止而諸蘊之依尚存者所施設的涅槃界；與無餘依之分在本單元末段。
⁷ 親依止（upanissaya）：強力之所依；本論謂涅槃是那名為不生之滅的盡之所依，故就此假名而說涅槃為「盡」。
The vernacular of this unit is this edition’s own rendering-with-exposition from the Pāli original (tr. mine); see this unit’s apparatus for the base-text particulars.
§1 Explanation of the Truth of Origin—The Four Phrases on Craving and the Three Cravings 〔CSCD §553〕
Discussion of the Explanation of Origin
And in the explanation of origin: “it is this craving” means this craving. “Leading to renewed existence”—what makes renewed existence¹ is renewed existence; because renewed existence is its habit, it is what leads to renewed existence. “Accompanied by delight and lust” means that which goes together with delight and lust; the meaning is that it has become one with delight and lust in meaning. “Delighting here and there”—wherever individual existence arises, there it delights. “That is” is an indeclinable, and its meaning is “which are they?” “Craving for sensuality, craving for existence, craving for non-existence”—these will be made clear in the explanation of dependent arising. And it should be understood that here these three [cravings], by the meaning of producing the truth of suffering, are made into one and called “the noble truth of the origin of suffering.”
This is the method in the explanation of origin.
§2 Why Cessation Is Taught as the Cessation of Origin; the Verse on the Root; the Lion and the Dog 〔CSCD §554〕
Discussion of the Explanation of Cessation
If it is said: in the explanation of the cessation of suffering, what is stated in the manner of “of that same craving” and so on is the cessation of origin—why is that?—Because through the cessation of origin there is the cessation of suffering. For suffering ceases only through the cessation of origin, not otherwise. Hence it is said:
“Just as, when the root is unharmed and firm,／a tree, though cut down, grows again;／so too, when the latent tendency² of craving is not uprooted,／this suffering arises again and again.”
Thus, because suffering ceases only through the cessation of origin, the Blessed One, when proclaiming the cessation of suffering, proclaimed it only by way of the cessation of origin. For the Tathāgatas behave like lions. When they bring suffering to cessation and when they teach the cessation of suffering, they work upon the cause, not upon the fruit. But the outsiders behave like dogs. When they bring suffering to cessation and when they teach the cessation of suffering, with teachings of devotion to self-torment and the like they work upon the fruit, not upon the cause. Thus, first, the purpose of teaching the cessation of suffering by way of the cessation of origin should be understood.
§3 The Meaning of the Phrases of the Truth of Cessation, and the Characteristic, Function, and Manifestation of Nibbāna 〔CSCD §555–556〕
And this is its meaning: “of that same craving”—of that craving already stated as “leading to renewed existence” and analyzed by way of craving for sensuality and the rest. “Fading-away” refers to the path, because it was said “through fading-away one is released.” Cessation through fading-away is fading-away-and-cessation. Fading-away-and-cessation that is remainderless through the uprooting of the latent tendency is remainderless fading-away-and-cessation. Or else, “fading-away” refers to abandoning; so it should be understood that here too the connection may be made thus: remainderless fading-away, remainderless cessation. And in meaning, all of these are synonyms³ of nibbāna. For in the ultimate sense, “the noble truth of the cessation of suffering” refers to nibbāna. And because in dependence on it craving both fades away and ceases, it is called fading-away and cessation. And because only in dependence on it is there the giving up and the rest of that [craving], and because in it there is not even a single attachment to the five strands of sensuality⁴, it is called “giving up, relinquishment, release, non-attachment.”
And this [nibbāna] has peace as its characteristic, the deathless as its function—or bringing comfort as its function; and the signless as its manifestation—or non-proliferation as its manifestation.
§4 The Discussion That Nibbāna Is Not Non-Existent—Undiscoverability, and the Way of Practice Not Fruitless 〔CSCD §557–558〕
Discussion of Nibbāna
If it is said: nibbāna does not exist at all, because it is undiscoverable like a hare’s horn—not so, because it is discoverable by means. For it is discoverable by the means called the appropriate way of practice, as the supramundane mind of others [is known] through the knowledge of others’ minds⁵; therefore it should not be said, “because it is undiscoverable, it does not exist.” For it should not be said, “whatever the foolish ordinary person does not discover does not exist.”
Moreover, it should not be said that nibbāna does not exist. Why? Because [in that case] the way of practice would become fruitless. For if there were no nibbāna, then the right way of practice, led by right view and included in the three aggregates beginning with virtue, would become fruitless; but it is not fruitless, because it leads to nibbāna.
If it is said: the way of practice does not become fruitless, because it leads to “non-existence”—not so, because in the non-existence of the past and the future there is no attainment of nibbāna.
If it is said: the non-existence of present phenomena is nibbāna—not so, because their non-existence is impossible; and if [they] were non-existent, they would be non-present; and because at the moment of the path that depends on the present aggregates there is the arising of the nibbāna element with residue remaining⁶, there is a fault [in saying it is non-existence].
If it is said: at that time, because the defilements are not present, there is no fault—not so, because [in that case] the noble path would become useless. For if that were so, then even before the moment of the noble path the defilements would not exist, and so the noble path would become useless. Therefore this is no reason.
§5 Refutation of “Destruction Is Nibbāna” 〔CSCD §559〕
If it is said: because of the statement “Friend, whatever is the destruction of lust” and so on, “destruction is nibbāna”—not so, because [in that case] the fruit of arahantship too would become mere destruction. For it too is indicated in the manner of “Friend, whatever is the destruction of lust” and so on. Moreover, [in that case] nibbāna would have the fault of becoming temporary and so on. For if that were so, nibbāna would become temporary, would have the characteristics of the conditioned, and would be attainable without regard to right effort; and precisely because it had the characteristics of the conditioned, it would be included in the conditioned; because it was included in the conditioned, it would be burned by the fires of lust and the rest; because it was burned, it would be suffering.
If it is said: because after destruction there is no further occurrence, as it is called, that [non-occurrence] is nibbāna, and so there is no fault—not so, because there is no such destruction; and even if there were, it would not escape the faults stated above; and the noble path too would become nibbāna. For the noble path brings about the destruction of the faults, and so it is called destruction; and after it the faults no longer occur.
And because nibbāna is, in a qualified sense, the decisive support⁷ of that destruction called the cessation that is non-arising, it is spoken of as “destruction” by the figurative designation “of what it is the decisive support.”
If it is said: then why is it not stated by its own characteristic?—Because it is extremely subtle. And its extreme subtlety is established because it brought on the Blessed One’s disinclination [to teach], and because it is to be seen by the noble eye.
§6 The Qualities of Nibbāna—Unshared, Beginningless, Permanent; With Residue and Without Residue 〔CSCD §560–561〕
And this [nibbāna], because it is to be attained by one possessed of the path, is unshared; because it has no former limit, it is unoriginated.
If it is said: because it exists only when there is the path, it is not unoriginated—not so, because it is not producible by the path. For it is only to be attained by the path, not to be produced. Therefore it is precisely unoriginated. Because it is unoriginated, it is without aging and death. Because it has no origination, aging, or death, it is permanent.
If it is said: like nibbāna, atoms and the rest would also become permanent—not so, because there is no reason. If it is said: because nibbāna is permanent, they too are permanent—not so, because the characteristic of the reason is not established. If it is said: they are permanent because they have no arising and so on, like nibbāna—not so, because atoms and the rest are themselves not established.
And because there is the reasoning stated above, only this [nibbāna] is permanent; because it transcends the nature of materiality, it is immaterial. Because the consummation of the Buddhas and the rest has no distinction, it is one consummation only. For one who attains it by development, it can be made known by the stilling of defilements together with the residue remaining; because it is made known together with the residue remaining, it is with residue remaining. But for one in whom, through the abandoning of origin, the future fruit of kamma is destroyed, after the final mind the aggregates of occurrence no longer arise and those that have arisen disappear, so that there is the non-existence of the residue remaining; it can be made known by that [non-existence of the residue remaining], and so it is said “here there is no residue remaining,” and therefore it is without residue remaining.
Because it can be reached by the distinction of knowledge accomplished through unremitting endeavor, and because there is the word of the Omniscient One, nibbāna in the ultimate sense is not non-existent by its nature. For this was said: “Bhikkhus, there is the unborn, the unbecome, the unmade, the unconditioned.”
This is the door of the discussion of the analysis in the explanation of the cessation of suffering.
Notes
¹ Renewed existence (punabbhava): existence taken up again after this life; craving has the making of renewed existence as its habit, and so is called what leads to renewed existence.
² Latent tendency (anusaya): a defilement lying dormant and not yet active; the verse compares the unabandoned latent tendency of craving to an unuprooted root.
³ Synonym (vevacana): another name for the same thing; the phrases of the set formula of the truth of cessation are, in meaning, all synonyms of nibbāna.
⁴ Attachment to the five strands of sensuality (kāmaguṇālaya): attachment to the five sensual objects of visible form, sound, odor, taste, and touch; the treatise explains the phrase “non-attachment” by their total absence in nibbāna.
⁵ Knowledge of others’ minds (cetopariyañāṇa): the knowledge that knows the minds of others; the treatise uses it as the example of what is “not seen yet discoverable by means.”
⁶ The nibbāna element with residue remaining (sopādisesanibbānadhātu): the nibbāna element made known in one whose defilements are stilled but whose aggregates still remain as the basis; its distinction from that without residue remaining is in the final passage of this unit.
⁷ Decisive support (upanissaya): a powerful support; the treatise says nibbāna is the support of that destruction called the cessation that is non-arising, and so by this figurative designation nibbāna is called “destruction.”
滅苦要砍在因上——師子逐人不逐杖；而涅槃非無：一場七回合的答難，立「不生、不成、不作、無為」
大局 — 從渴愛到涅槃實有之辨
苦諦的十二法決擇完畢，本單元一氣走過集與滅：先釋集諦定型句（渴愛四語與三愛，§1），再答一個機警的提問——為什麼滅諦的定型句說的是集之滅而不是苦之滅（§2）——由此帶出滅諦諸語之義與涅槃的相味現起（§3）。然後是本單元的重頭戲：涅槃之論——論主與設難者一連七回合的攻防（§4–§6），從「涅槃不可得故無」一路辯到「盡即涅槃」「無即涅槃」，終於立住：涅槃就第一義而言依自性並非不存在——「有不生、不成、不作、無為」。這是全論裡涅槃作為實有之法被正面論證的地方，語極簡而鋒極利。〔所見〕
§01 集諦之釋——渴愛四語與三愛 → 白話 §1
集諦定型句逐語釋：「凡是這渴愛」——就是這個渴愛；「能引後有者」——以作後有為常習；「與歡喜及貪俱」——與歡喜及貪就義已成為一；「於彼彼而歡喜」——自體生於何處即歡喜於何處；「謂如」發問；「欲愛、有愛、無有愛」——三愛留待緣起之解釋（第 17 品）。三愛以令苦諦生起之義合為一，故說苦集聖諦（白話 §1）。〔讀法〕「於彼彼而歡喜」五字是集諦的素描：不論生在哪裡——哪怕境遇再壞——渴愛都能就地歡喜、就地紮根；三愛合為一，因為判它們為集的判準只有一條：令苦生。
§02 何以以集滅說滅·樹根之偈·師子與狗 → 白話 §2
設問：滅諦定型句說的是渴愛之滅（集之滅），何以名苦滅？答：苦唯由集之滅而滅，不由別的——樹根堅固時，樹雖被砍倒還會再生；渴愛隨眠未拔時，苦一再生起。故世尊宣說苦滅唯以集之滅宣說。隨後一喻判分家風：諸如來行處同師子——滅苦於因行道，不於果；諸外道行處同狗——以自苦之勤修等於果行道，不於因（白話 §2）。〔讀法〕師子與狗之喻辛辣而準確：擲杖，狗逐杖、師子逐人。苦是杖，集是擲杖的手——一切「硬扛果報」式的修行都是逐杖；本論全書的觀智工程之所以最終指向渴愛與無明，理據在此一節。
§03 滅諦諸語之義與涅槃之相味現起 → 白話 §3
定型句逐語連結：「凡是那同一渴愛的」承前；「離貪」或說道（由離貪而解脫）、或說斷——由隨眠根除而無餘的離貪之滅，即無餘離貪之滅；就義而言，這一切皆涅槃之異名——第一義中「苦滅聖諦」即說涅槃：緣於它，渴愛離貪而滅，故名離貪、名滅；唯緣於它有渴愛之捨等，其中於五欲功德之執著一無所有，故名捨、捨遣、解脫、無執著。涅槃以寂靜為相，不死（或作安慰）為味，無相（或無戲論）為現起（白話 §3）。〔讀法〕滅諦的五個名字全是指月之指：離貪、滅、捨、捨遣、無執著——名雖繫於渴愛之息，所指卻是那使息滅得以發生的無為之法。相味現起三欄（寂靜・不死・無相）是涅槃僅有的正面描述，一欄也不多給。
§04 涅槃非無之論——不可得與行道不空 → 白話 §4
答難第一輪：「涅槃如兔角不可得，故無」——不然：它以相應之行道的方便而可得，如以他心智知他人出世間心；「愚凡夫所不得即無」不成立。第二輪：若涅槃無，則以正見為前導、三蘊所攝的行道空無果——而行道非無果，以能令至涅槃故。第三輪：「行道令至於『無』即可」——不然：過去未來之無中並無涅槃之得。第四輪：「現在諸法之無即涅槃」——不然：現在法之無不可能（無則非現在）；且道之剎那有有餘依涅槃界之生起，說無即有過失。第五輪：「那時煩惱非現在故無過」——不然：則聖道剎那之前煩惱亦不存在，聖道成為無用（白話 §4）。〔讀法〕五輪的對手是一個共同的底調：把涅槃讀成純否定（無、缺席）。論主的反擊每次都落在同一點——若涅槃只是無，則道與果的實效無處安放。「愚凡夫所不得即無」一句尤其該記：不可得性判定的是觀察者的品位，不是對象的有無。
§05 「盡即涅槃」之破 → 白話 §5
第六輪：「經說『凡是貪之盡』，故盡即涅槃」——不然：則阿羅漢果也成唯是盡（同式指示故）；且涅槃將成暫時、有為之相、不待正精進可得——有為所攝則被貪等諸火所燒，被燒則苦。第七輪：「盡後不再轉起，那不轉起即涅槃」——不然：無那樣的盡；縱有，不出前過；且聖道也將成涅槃（道令諸過失盡故亦名盡）。正解：涅槃是那名為不生之滅的盡之親依止，故以「它是誰的親依止」之假名而說為盡。補問：何不以自相說？——因極微細：微細至招致世尊之無意樂說法、且唯聖眼所應見（白話 §5）。〔讀法〕「盡」之辨是全單元最細的一刀：盡是事件，涅槃是所依——把事件當終點，涅槃就塌成有為。末句「極微細」誠實得動人：連定型句都用異名與假名逼近，因為自相處唯聖眼可見——論說到這裡，把棒子交還給修證。
§06 涅槃之德——不共無始常·有餘無餘 → 白話 §6
正面立德：具道者所應得故不共；無前際故無出生——「道有時它才有」不然：涅槃唯是道所應得、非所應生；無出生故無老死，故常。「則極微等也常」——不然：無理由、因相不成、極微自身不成立。故唯涅槃常；超越色之自性故無色；諸佛究竟無別故唯一究竟。有餘依無餘依之分：煩惱寂止而依之餘尚存，就此施設有餘依；斷集而未來業果已壞者，最後心後諸蘊不起、已起者隱沒，就依之餘之無施設無餘依。結證：以不緩之勇猛所成就的智之殊勝可證得、又有一切知者之語——涅槃就第一義依自性並非不存在：「比丘們啊，有不生、不成、不作、無為」（白話 §6）。〔讀法〕「應得非所生」是本節樞紐：道不製造涅槃，道抵達涅槃——製造出來的必屬有為，抵達的可以本自無生。有餘無餘之分也講得極清：分的是施設之所依（餘依存否），不是涅槃有二。末引「有不生不成不作無為」四個「不」立一個「有」——全單元七輪答難，收在這一句經文上。〔所見〕
給一般讀者
這一單元回答兩個大哉問。第一問：滅苦該從哪裡下手？——師子與狗的譬喻給了答案：狗逐杖，師子逐擲杖的人；苦是杖，渴愛是手，砍樹要砍根。第二問：涅槃是不是「什麼都沒有」？——七輪答難逐一拆掉這個誤解：若涅槃只是無，修道就無果可至、聖道就無用武之地；涅槃是「不生、不成、不作、無為」——四個否定圈出一個實有，微細到唯聖眼可見，但方便上循道可得。讀不動七輪論辯的話，記住兩句就好：滅在因上，涅槃非無。道諦接著講怎麼走——下一單元。
想讀本單元全文：白話 §1–§6 即集諦定型句逐語之釋、樹根之偈與師子狗之喻、滅諦諸語與涅槃相味現起、涅槃非無之五輪答難、盡即涅槃之破與極微細之答、涅槃之德與有餘無餘之分的全段逐段全譯。
To end suffering, cut at the cause—the lion goes for the man, not the stick; and nibbāna is not non-existent: a debate of seven rounds establishes “the unborn, the unbecome, the unmade, the unconditioned”
The Big Picture — From Craving to the Argument That Nibbāna Is Real
With the twelve phenomena of the truth of suffering analyzed, this unit runs through origin and cessation in one breath: first the set formula of the truth of origin is explained (the four phrases on craving and the three cravings, §1); then a sharp question is answered—why does the set formula of the truth of cessation speak of the cessation of origin rather than the cessation of suffering (§2)—which leads into the meaning of the phrases of the truth of cessation and the characteristic, function, and manifestation of nibbāna (§3). Then comes the centerpiece of the unit: the discussion of nibbāna—seven consecutive rounds of attack and defense between the Commentator and an objector (§4–§6), arguing from “nibbāna does not exist because it is undiscoverable” all the way through “destruction is nibbāna” and “non-existence is nibbāna,” until it is finally established that nibbāna in the ultimate sense is not non-existent by its nature—“there is the unborn, the unbecome, the unmade, the unconditioned.” This is the place in the whole treatise where nibbāna as a real phenomenon is argued head-on; the words are extremely spare and the edge extremely sharp. 〔Observation〕
§01 Explanation of the Truth of Origin—The Four Phrases on Craving and the Three Cravings → Vernacular §1
The set formula of the truth of origin is explained phrase by phrase: “it is this craving”—this craving; “leading to renewed existence”—having the making of renewed existence as its habit; “accompanied by delight and lust”—become one with delight and lust in meaning; “delighting here and there”—wherever individual existence arises, there it delights; “that is” poses the question; “craving for sensuality, craving for existence, craving for non-existence”—the three cravings are left to the explanation of dependent arising (Chapter 17). The three cravings are made one by the meaning of producing the truth of suffering, and so it is called the noble truth of the origin of suffering (vernacular §1). 〔Reading〕 The phrase “delighting here and there” is the sketch of the truth of origin: wherever one is born—however bad the circumstances—craving can delight on the spot and take root on the spot; the three cravings are made one because there is only one criterion for judging them to be origin: they produce suffering.
§02 Why Cessation Is Taught as the Cessation of Origin; the Verse on the Root; the Lion and the Dog → Vernacular §2
The question is posed: the set formula of the truth of cessation speaks of the cessation of craving (the cessation of origin); why is it called the cessation of suffering? The answer: suffering ceases only through the cessation of origin, not otherwise—when the root is firm, a tree, though cut down, grows again; when the latent tendency of craving is not uprooted, suffering arises again and again. Hence the Blessed One taught the cessation of suffering only by way of the cessation of origin. A simile then distinguishes two family styles: the Tathāgatas behave like lions—they end suffering by working on the cause, not the fruit; the outsiders behave like dogs—with devotion to self-torment and the like they work on the fruit, not the cause (vernacular §2). 〔Reading〕 The simile of the lion and the dog is biting and exact: throw a stick, and the dog chases the stick while the lion goes for the man. Suffering is the stick; origin is the hand that throws it—every practice of the “grit your teeth and bear the result” kind is chasing the stick; the reason the whole treatise’s project of insight knowledge finally points at craving and ignorance lies in this section.
§03 The Meaning of the Phrases of the Truth of Cessation, and the Characteristic, Function, and Manifestation of Nibbāna → Vernacular §3
The set formula is connected phrase by phrase: “of that same craving” takes up what precedes; “fading-away” refers either to the path (through fading-away one is released) or to abandoning—fading-away-and-cessation that is remainderless through the uprooting of the latent tendency is remainderless fading-away-and-cessation; in meaning all of these are synonyms of nibbāna—in the ultimate sense “the noble truth of the cessation of suffering” refers to nibbāna: in dependence on it craving fades away and ceases, hence it is called fading-away and cessation; only in dependence on it is there the giving up and the rest of craving, and in it there is no attachment whatever to the five strands of sensuality, hence it is called giving up, relinquishment, release, non-attachment. Nibbāna has peace as its characteristic, the deathless (or bringing comfort) as its function, and the signless (or non-proliferation) as its manifestation (vernacular §3). 〔Reading〕 The five names of the truth of cessation are all fingers pointing at the moon: fading-away, cessation, giving up, relinquishment, non-attachment—though the names are tied to the stilling of craving, what they point at is the unconditioned phenomenon that lets the stilling happen. The three columns of characteristic, function, and manifestation (peace・the deathless・the signless) are the only positive description nibbāna receives, and not one column more is given.
§04 The Discussion That Nibbāna Is Not Non-Existent—Undiscoverability, and the Way of Practice Not Fruitless → Vernacular §4
First round of the debate: “nibbāna is undiscoverable like a hare’s horn, hence non-existent”—not so: it is discoverable by the means of the appropriate way of practice, as the supramundane mind of others is known through the knowledge of others’ minds; “what the foolish ordinary person does not discover does not exist” does not hold. Second round: if nibbāna did not exist, the way of practice led by right view and included in the three aggregates would be fruitless—but the way of practice is not fruitless, because it leads to nibbāna. Third round: “it suffices that the way of practice leads to ‘non-existence’”—not so: in the non-existence of the past and the future there is no attainment of nibbāna. Fourth round: “the non-existence of present phenomena is nibbāna”—not so: the non-existence of present phenomena is impossible (if non-existent, they would be non-present); and at the moment of the path there is the arising of the nibbāna element with residue remaining, so to call it non-existence is a fault. Fifth round: “at that time the defilements are not present, so there is no fault”—not so: then even before the moment of the noble path the defilements would not exist, and the noble path would become useless (vernacular §4). 〔Reading〕 The five rounds share one opponent, a common undertone: reading nibbāna as pure negation (non-existence, absence). The Commentator’s counterattack lands on the same point every time—if nibbāna were merely non-existence, the real efficacy of path and fruit would have nowhere to rest. The sentence “what the foolish ordinary person does not discover does not exist” especially deserves remembering: undiscoverability judges the rank of the observer, not the existence or non-existence of the object.
§05 Refutation of “Destruction Is Nibbāna” → Vernacular §5
Sixth round: “the sutta says ‘whatever is the destruction of lust,’ hence destruction is nibbāna”—not so: then the fruit of arahantship too would become mere destruction (being indicated by the same formula); and nibbāna would become temporary, with the characteristics of the conditioned, attainable without regard to right effort—included in the conditioned, it would be burned by the fires of lust and the rest, and being burned, it would be suffering. Seventh round: “after destruction there is no further occurrence; that non-occurrence is nibbāna”—not so: there is no such destruction; even if there were, it would not escape the earlier faults; and the noble path too would become nibbāna (since the path brings about the destruction of the faults, it too is called destruction). The correct account: nibbāna is the decisive support of that destruction called the cessation that is non-arising, and so is called destruction by the figurative designation “of what it is the decisive support.” A supplementary question: why not state it by its own characteristic?—Because it is extremely subtle: subtle to the point of bringing on the Blessed One’s disinclination to teach, and to be seen only by the noble eye (vernacular §5). 〔Reading〕 The distinction concerning “destruction” is the finest cut in the unit: destruction is an event, nibbāna is what it rests on—treat the event as the terminus and nibbāna collapses into the conditioned. The final words, “extremely subtle,” are movingly honest: even the set formula approaches it through synonyms and figurative designations, because at the point of its own characteristic it is visible only to the noble eye—at this point the treatise hands the baton back to practice and realization.
§06 The Qualities of Nibbāna—Unshared, Beginningless, Permanent; With Residue and Without Residue → Vernacular §6
The qualities are stated positively: to be attained by one possessed of the path, hence unshared; having no former limit, hence unoriginated—“it exists only when there is the path” is not so: nibbāna is only to be attained by the path, not to be produced; unoriginated, hence without aging and death, hence permanent. “Then atoms and the rest are also permanent”—not so: there is no reason, the characteristic of the reason is not established, and atoms themselves are not established. Hence only nibbāna is permanent; transcending the nature of materiality, it is immaterial; the consummation of the Buddhas has no distinction, hence one consummation only. The distinction of with residue remaining and without residue remaining: where the defilements are stilled but the residue remains, with residue remaining is made known on that basis; where one has abandoned origin and the future fruit of kamma is destroyed, so that after the final mind the aggregates do not arise and those that have arisen disappear, without residue remaining is made known on the basis of the non-existence of the residue. The concluding proof: it can be reached by the distinction of knowledge accomplished through unremitting endeavor, and there is the word of the Omniscient One—nibbāna in the ultimate sense is not non-existent by its nature: “Bhikkhus, there is the unborn, the unbecome, the unmade, the unconditioned” (vernacular §6). 〔Reading〕 “To be attained, not produced” is the pivot of this section: the path does not manufacture nibbāna, the path arrives at nibbāna—whatever is manufactured must belong to the conditioned; what is arrived at may be unborn from the first. The distinction of with and without residue is also made perfectly clear: what is distinguished is the basis of the designation (whether the residue remains), not a twofold nibbāna. The closing citation, “there is the unborn, the unbecome, the unmade, the unconditioned,” establishes one “there is” through four “un-”s—the unit’s seven rounds of debate come to rest on this one sentence of scripture. 〔Observation〕
For the General Reader
This unit answers two great questions. First question: where should one start in ending suffering?—The simile of the lion and the dog gives the answer: the dog chases the stick, the lion goes for the one who threw it; suffering is the stick, craving is the hand; to fell a tree, cut the root. Second question: is nibbāna “nothing at all”?—Seven rounds of debate take this misunderstanding apart piece by piece: if nibbāna were mere non-existence, the practice of the path would have no fruit to reach and the noble path would have no use; nibbāna is “the unborn, the unbecome, the unmade, the unconditioned”—four negations fence in one reality, subtle to the point of being visible only to the noble eye, yet by means attainable along the path. If the seven rounds of argument are too much, remember just two sentences: cessation is at the cause, and nibbāna is not non-existent. The truth of the path then tells how to walk—the next unit.
To read this unit in full: vernacular §1–§6 is the complete paragraph-by-paragraph rendering of the phrase-by-phrase explanation of the set formula of the truth of origin, the verse on the root and the simile of the lion and the dog, the phrases of the truth of cessation and the characteristic, function, and manifestation of nibbāna, the five rounds of debate that nibbāna is not non-existent, the refutation of “destruction is nibbāna” and the answer of extreme subtlety, and the qualities of nibbāna with the distinction of with and without residue.
考據Apparatus
一、科判定位
譯底 本單元之譯底＝CSCD（內用不上站）。本層一切巴利逐字取自本單元原典欄之譯底，定位一式：〔CSCD §NN〕式對譯底欄逐字可核。本品無自家對頁之巴利，故頁域一概不記。
篇名 譯底欄自帶 ### 行 3 個，皆本篇之小節題：### Samudayaniddesakathā・### Nirodhaniddesakathā・### Nibbānakathā。本單元之讀者面題取其三之義而其幅涵三——科題與本篇之全幅不同度，誌其實。三節之幅實測 758／1,924／3,890 位元組（各節之 ### 題行本身之位元組計入其節）——第三節之幅獨大，過本篇之半。
段號域 譯底欄之段號自〔CSCD §553〕至〔CSCD §561〕，實落段號 9 個，號序連續無缺。本篇於譯底欄之幅為 6,572 位元組。
三節之科與所釋之諦 第一節釋集諦（十二法之後所開之第二科），第二節與第三節釋滅諦。集諦一節僅 758 位元組而滅諦二節合 5,814 位元組——其幅之比約一比七點七，本目誌其實而不代裁其所以。
體裁之變 第一節與第二節為逐語之釋（承前二單元之式），第三節則為難答之論——難者之語尾 ce（若言…者）詞界全篇實測 12 見、論主之破語 Na,（不然）10 見，其大半集於第三節。本篇為處界根諦二品九單元中唯一以難答為骨之篇，本目誌其實。
收束語之不齊 第一節以 Ayaṃ samudayaniddese nayo.（縮排二空格）收，而第二第三節合以 Idaṃ dukkhanirodhaniddese vinicchayakathāmukhaṃ.（縮排二空格）收——二收語之式不同（前者作 nayo、後者作 vinicchayakathāmukhaṃ），且第二節之末無其自收。誌其實。
前後接點 前承愁悲等之單元：本篇首句作 Samudayaniddese pana yāyaṃ taṇhāti yā ayaṃ taṇhā——逐字承前篇之收句 Ayaṃ tāva dukkhaniddese nayo.，論以 pana（然則）自標其為續開之科。後接道諦之單元：本篇收句 Idaṃ dukkhanirodhaniddese vinicchayakathāmukhaṃ.，次單元即以 Dukkhanirodhagāminipaṭipadāniddese vuttā pana aṭṭha dhammā 逐字承之——論自標之續。
movement 品夾《總覽》繫本單元於 §E〈集諦・滅諦與涅槃之論〉一節；其所繫之章§逐字見該表，本目不重錄、不截取——段號與章§二系不明對映，不推估不換算。
二、詞義與譯語
本目只記本篇用法與其定位；名相定讀以規範詞表為準，詞表所未定者，本目不代定。前此諸品已立之讀不重解——本篇所涉之既立詞為 taṇhā（渴愛）・kāmataṇhā・bhavataṇhā・vibhavataṇhā（欲愛・有愛・無有愛）・nibbāna（涅槃）・virāga（離欲）・cāga（捨）・ālayasamugghāta（執著之根除）・anusaya（隨眠）・sacca（諦）・magga（本篇作 Virāgo vuccati maggo）・cetopariyañāṇa（他心智）・asādhāraṇa（不共）・nicca（常）・saṅkhata（有為）・asaṅkhata（無為）・amata（不死）・khema（安隱）・santa（寂靜）・upādāna（取）・khandha（蘊）・kilesa（煩惱）・ariyamagga（聖道）・arahatta（阿羅漢果）。以下唯列本篇新出者。
集諦之四語〔CSCD §553〕
| 巴利 | 本編用語 | 本篇用法之要 | 定位 |
|---|---|---|---|
| ponobbhavikā | 能引後有者 | 集諦定型句之第一語；論自釋 punabbhavakaraṇaṃ punobbhavo, punobbhavo sīlametissāti | 〔CSCD §553〕 |
| punabbhava | 後有 | 上語之體 | 〔CSCD §553〕 |
| nandīrāgasahagatā | 與歡喜及貪俱者 | 第二語；論自釋其與喜貪於義為一 | 〔CSCD §553〕 |
| tatra tatrābhinandinī | 於彼彼而歡喜者 | 第三語；論自釋 yatra yatra attabhāvo nibbattati, tatra tatrābhinandinī | 〔CSCD §553〕 |
| seyyathidanti nipāto | 「謂如」為不變詞 | 第四語之判；論自釋其義即「其何者耶」 | 〔CSCD §553〕 |
| nibbattakaṭṭha | 令生之義 | 三愛合為一集諦之由 | 〔CSCD §553〕 |
何以以集滅說滅〔CSCD §554〕
| 巴利 | 本編用語 | 本篇用法之要 | 定位 |
|---|---|---|---|
| samudayanirodha | 集之滅 | 本節之樞；論自設難 so kasmāti ce? 而答以「由集滅而苦滅」 | 〔CSCD §554〕 |
| sīhasamānavuttino | 行如師子者 | 諸如來之喻；滅苦說滅皆從其因下手 | 〔CSCD §554〕 |
| suvānavuttino | 行如狗者 | 諸異學之喻；滅苦說滅唯從其果下手 | 〔CSCD §554〕 |
| hetumhi paṭipajjanti・phale paṭipajjanti | 於因而行道・於果而行道 | 上二喻之所配之義 | 〔CSCD §554〕 |
| attakilamathānuyogadesanā | 自苦之勤修之說 | 異學於果下手之例 | 〔CSCD §554〕 |
滅諦五語與涅槃之相〔CSCD §555〕–〔CSCD §556〕
| 巴利 | 本編用語 | 本篇用法之要 | 定位 |
|---|---|---|---|
| asesavirāganirodho | 無餘離貪之滅 | 滅諦定型句之第一語；論分二釋（以道為離欲、以斷為離欲） | 〔CSCD §555〕 |
| paṭinissaggo | 捨遣 | 第三語 | 〔CSCD §555〕 |
| mutti | 解脫 | 第四語 | 〔CSCD §555〕 |
| anālayo | 無執著 | 第五語；論自釋 kāmaguṇālayesu cettha ekopi ālayo natthi | 〔CSCD §555〕 |
| vevacana | 異名 | 論之判語：五語於義皆涅槃之異名 | 〔CSCD §555〕 |
| assāsakaraṇarasa | 作安慰之味 | 涅槃之味之異說 | 〔CSCD §556〕 |
| nippapañcapaccupaṭṭhāna | 無戲論之現起 | 涅槃之現起之異說 | 〔CSCD §556〕 |
涅槃非無之論〔CSCD §557〕–〔CSCD §561〕
| 巴利 | 本編用語 | 本篇用法之要 | 定位 |
|---|---|---|---|
| sasavisāṇa | 兔角 | 難者之喻；謂涅槃如兔角之不可得故無 | 〔CSCD §557〕 |
| upāyena upalabbhanīyato | 以方便而可得故 | 論之破；涅槃以相應之行道為方便而可得 | 〔CSCD §557〕 |
| bālaputhujjana | 愚凡夫 | 論之破語所出之人；愚凡夫所不得者非即無 | 〔CSCD §557〕 |
| vañjhabhāvāpajjana | 至於空無果 | 第二破；若無涅槃則正行道成空 | 〔CSCD §558〕 |
| sammādiṭṭhipurejavā sammāpaṭipatti | 以正見為前導之正行道 | 上破之所指 | 〔CSCD §558〕 |
| sopādisesanibbānadhātu | 有餘依涅槃界 | 論破「現在諸法之無即涅槃」之語所出 | 〔CSCD §558〕 |
| ariyamaggassa niratthakabhāvāpajjana | 至於聖道之無用 | 第三破 | 〔CSCD §558〕 |
| khayo | 盡 | 第四難之語；論破「盡即涅槃」 | 〔CSCD §559〕 |
| ittarakāla | 暫時 | 上破之過失之一；若盡即涅槃，則涅槃成暫時 | 〔CSCD §559〕 |
| sammāvāyāmanirapekkhādhigamanīyabhāva | 不待正精進而可得之性 | 上破之過失之一 | 〔CSCD §559〕 |
| anuppattinirodha | 不生之滅 | 論之正說；涅槃為此盡之所依而以方便名之為盡 | 〔CSCD §559〕 |
| atisukhuma | 極微細 | 涅槃不以自相說之由 | 〔CSCD §559〕 |
| apposukkabhāvāvahana | 招致無意樂說法 | 極微細之證之一 | 〔CSCD §559〕 |
| ariyena cakkhunā passitabba | 為聖眼所應見 | 極微細之證之二 | 〔CSCD §559〕 |
| maggasamaṅgī | 具道者 | 涅槃不共之由；唯具道者所得 | 〔CSCD §560〕 |
| purimakoṭiyā abhāva・appabhava | 前際之無・無出生 | 涅槃之德；無前際故無所從生 | 〔CSCD §560〕 |
| pattabba・na uppādetabba | 應得・非應生 | 論之辨；涅槃為道所得而非道所生 | 〔CSCD §560〕 |
| ajarāmaraṇa | 無老死 | 涅槃之德；由無出生故 | 〔CSCD §560〕 |
| aṇu | 極微 | 難者所舉之他常法；論以其無因、其相不成而破之 | 〔CSCD §560〕 |
| rūpasabhāvātikkamato arūpaṃ | 超色自性故無色 | 涅槃之德 | 〔CSCD §561〕 |
| ekāva niṭṭhā | 一究竟 | 涅槃之德；諸佛等之究竟無別 | 〔CSCD §561〕 |
| upādisesa | 依之餘 | 有餘無餘二涅槃界之判準 | 〔CSCD §561〕 |
| saupādisesa | 有餘依 | 以煩惱之寂止與依餘而施設者 | 〔CSCD §561〕 |
| anupādisesa | 無餘依 | 以最後心之後諸蘊不生而施設者 | 〔CSCD §561〕 |
| upahatāyatikammaphala | 未來業果已壞者 | 無餘依之界之語 | 〔CSCD §561〕 |
| asithilaparakkamasiddha ñāṇavisesa | 由不緩之勇猛所成之智之殊勝 | 涅槃可得之證之一 | 〔CSCD §561〕 |
| sabbaññuvacana | 一切知者之語 | 涅槃實有之證之二 | 〔CSCD §561〕 |
| ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ | 不生・不成・不作・無為 | 論所引之結證 | 〔CSCD §561〕 |
⚠︎ 闕疑以俟來哲之二處 ①samudaya（集）與 nirodha 之複合位——dukkhasamudaya（苦之集）・dukkhanirodha（苦之滅）二名於既有諸品之詞條中無獨立條目，而 nirodha＝滅單字已立。本目讀作「苦之集」「苦之滅」而不代立其複合條；其取單字或取複合以俟來哲。②paṭinissagga（捨遣）・mutti（解脫）・anālaya（無執著）三名為滅諦定型句之語，於既有諸品之詞條中無獨立條目（ālayasamugghāta＝執著之根除已立，ālaya 之單字未立）。本目讀如上並誌其與既立之 ālayasamugghāta 同源——其讀以俟來哲。
三、異讀
材料之面 本篇無自家對頁之巴利，故無校勘段可錄；可查之面唯譯底欄自身。誌錄不判。
普查之實測 譯底欄全篇逐字普查：異讀括注式（(sī.)・(syā.)・(kaṃ.)・(pī.) 等）零命中；異誦之標識詞 pāṭho 零命中；異說之標識詞 Porāṇā／porāṇā・Keci／keci・eke 俱零命中。方括注唯二式（[§NN] 段號 9 個與版頁記 8 個，後者皆在註記之內）。查無即記無：譯底欄自身無異讀之記。
引號之對稱 全篇 '' 實測 22 處為偶數，開 11 收 11，逐處成對，無不對稱者。
本欄自出之一處括注之不齊——同一出處二式並見 〔CSCD §559〕之內，同一經之出處括注兩見而其書名之簡稱不同：前作 ''Yo kho, āvuso, rāgakkhayo''tiādivacanato (saṃ. ni. 4.315)，後作 ''yo kho, āvuso⋯, rāgakkhayo''tiādinā (sa. ni. 4.315) nayena niddiṭṭhaṃ——前者作 saṃ. ni.、後者作 sa. ni.（少一 ṃ），而二者之卷號段號逐字相同。本欄逐字實測：全篇 saṃ. ni. 2 見、sa. ni. 1 見。誌其字面不改、不代齊。
本欄之界 上列皆為譯底欄之字面之實；未與 PTS 掃描頁對勘。本欄之零命中唯就譯底欄一面，不以之推斷他本。
四、論主引據
論主自引之處，逐處繫段號錨；出處唯本文自標者記之，不代考定。「本文自標之出處」欄之括注逐字照錄，不代譯其經名。
| 位置 | 引式〔逐字〕 | 所引之要 | 本文自標之出處 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 〔CSCD §554〕 | Tenāha – 領起之偈 ''Yathāpi mūle anupaddave daḷhe, | 根未壞則斷樹復生——渴愛隨眠未拔則苦復生 | (dha. pa. 338) |
| 〔CSCD §555〕 | ''Virāgā vimuccatī''ti | 由離欲而解脫——離欲即道之據 | (ma. ni. 1.245; saṃ. ni. 3.14) |
| 〔CSCD §559〕 | ''Yo kho, āvuso, rāgakkhayo''tiādivacanato | 貪之盡——難者所據以立「盡即涅槃」 | (saṃ. ni. 4.315) |
| 〔CSCD §559〕 | ''yo kho, āvuso⋯, rāgakkhayo''tiādinā⋯nayena niddiṭṭhaṃ | 同一語式亦說阿羅漢果——論以之破上難 | (sa. ni. 4.315) |
| 〔CSCD §561〕 | Vuttañhetaṃ ''atthi, bhikkhave, ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhata''nti. | 有不生不成不作無為——涅槃實有之結證 | 無（自標引式而不繫括注） |
引式之數〔本欄實測〕 Tenāha 1 處・Vuttañhetaṃ 1 處・tiādivacanato 1 處・Yathāha・Vuttampi cetaṃ・Tena vuttaṃ・Tenetaṃ vuccati・Apare āhu・kira・Seyyathidaṃ 俱零命中。本文自標之圓括注出處 4 處，其分布為 saṃ. ni. 2・sa. ni. 1・ma. ni. 1・dha. pa. 1（有一處雙標，計入二數）。全篇之末引（涅槃實有之結證）不繫括注——此為本篇最要之證而其出處獨闕，誌其實，不代考定。此數唯就本篇之域，不及全書。
偈之括注在引內之一處 〔CSCD §554〕之偈以 ''ti 收而其括注 (dha. pa. 338); 落在偈之末行之內（縮排四空格之行末），非另起一行——與他單元之偈括注在段外者異式，誌其實不代移。
論主自陳之三處 ①〔CSCD §554〕Evaṃ tāva dukkhanirodhassa samudayanirodhavasena desanāya payojanaṃ veditabbaṃ——論自陳本節之所明唯在說滅之意趣。②〔CSCD §555〕Atthato pana sabbāneva⋯etāni nibbānassa vevacanāni——論自判滅諦五語於義皆涅槃之異名。③〔CSCD §559〕Sarūpeneva kasmā na vuttanti ce. Atisukhumattā——論自陳涅槃不以自相說之由。三處皆論主自陳，本目逐字錄其位而不代評。
五、譬喻·修辭
本目只記本篇譬喻之所在與其所配，不作文學評價。
甲・譬喻 本篇之 viya（詞界）2 見、iva 詞界 零命中、連聲之比況形 零命中、sadisa 諸形 零命中——二見皆在涅槃非無之論之首段〔CSCD §557〕；集諦一節與滅諦逐語之節一喻不出。另有二喻不以 viya 而以譬名直配：〔CSCD §554〕之師子與狗（Sīhasamānavuttino hi tathāgatā・Suvānavuttino pana titthiyā）與同段之樹根之偈（Yathāpi mūle anupaddave daḷhe，以 Yathāpi 領起）。
| 位置 | 譬喻 | 所配之義 |
|---|---|---|
| 〔CSCD §554〕 | Sīhasamānavuttino hi tathāgatā | 諸如來行如師子——中其射者而不逐其箭，於因下手 |
| 〔CSCD §554〕 | Suvānavuttino pana titthiyā | 諸異學行如狗——逐其所擲之物，於果下手 |
| 〔CSCD §554〕 | ''Yathāpi mūle anupaddave daḷhe, 與 Chinnopi rukkho punadeva rūhati; | 根牢未壞則斷樹復生——渴愛隨眠未拔則苦復生 |
| 〔CSCD §557〕 | sasavisāṇaṃ viya anupalabbhanīyatoti ce? | 難者之喻：涅槃如兔角之不可得 |
| 〔CSCD §557〕 | cetopariyañāṇena paresaṃ lokuttaracittaṃ viya | 論之破：如以他心智知他人之出世間心，涅槃亦以方便可得 |
乙・修辭之可核觀察 ①本篇之骨為難答之式：ce 之詞界全篇實測 12 見、論主之破語 Na, 10 見——難答十二回合，其十回合以 Na, 直破，餘二回合以他語破（Atisukhumattā 與 Samudayanirodhena dukkhanirodho）。此密度於處界根諦二品九單元中為獨高。②問句 3 見：so kasmāti ce?（〔CSCD §554〕）・Nattheva nibbānaṃ, sasavisāṇaṃ viya anupalabbhanīyatoti ce?（〔CSCD §557〕）・Apica nibbānaṃ natthīti na vattabbaṃ, kasmā?（〔CSCD §558〕）——三問皆論主代難者而設。③Tattha 之提示語 零命中——本篇不用分別之框。④…pe… 省略式 零命中。⑤偈頌 1 首 4 行（樹根之偈，縮排四空格）——為處界根諦二品九單元中偈頌最少之篇之一。⑥所引之經論塊 零處。⑦本篇無人事之事例——所出之比況皆物之比況或獸之比況。⑧收束語 2 見（Ayaṃ samudayaniddese nayo.・Idaṃ dukkhanirodhaniddese vinicchayakathāmukhaṃ.）而本篇有三節——一節無其自收（見目一）。
以上諸數唯就本篇之域實測，不及全書。
六、章內互讀
每指皆帶段號錨；所指之處唯就本篇文中可核之名相立——本篇之段號與章§二系不明對映，故所指不繫章§，亦不推估換算。不代考定。
| 本篇之處 | 所指 | 可核之由 |
|---|---|---|
〔CSCD §553〕 Kāmataṇhā bhavataṇhā vibhavataṇhāti imā paṭiccasamuppādaniddese āvibhavissanti | 緣起之品 | 論自標其所指之品（paṭiccasamuppādaniddese）並自標其為後說（āvibhavissanti）——本篇之前指唯此一處明繫品名 |
〔CSCD §553〕 Samudayaniddese pana yāyaṃ taṇhāti | 四諦總說之單元〔CSCD §537〕 | 彼篇所引 (vibha. 203) 之集諦定型句逐字在焉，本篇逐語釋之 |
〔CSCD §555〕 tassāyeva taṇhāyāti 以下五語之釋 | 四諦總說之單元〔CSCD §537〕 | 彼篇所引 (vibha. 204) 之滅諦定型句作 asesavirāganirodho cāgo paṭinissaggo mutti anālayo，本篇逐語釋之——彼篇出其引、本篇釋其語 |
〔CSCD §556〕 Tayidaṃ santilakkhaṇaṃ, accutirasaṃ, assāsakaraṇarasaṃ vā, animittapaccupaṭṭhānaṃ, nippapañcapaccupaṭṭhānaṃ vā | 四諦總說之單元〔CSCD §532〕 | 彼篇作 Santilakkhaṇaṃ⋯nirodhasaccaṃ, accutirasaṃ, animittapaccupaṭṭhānaṃ——同一三目而本篇各增一異說（vā 領起），本目誌其實不代裁 |
〔CSCD §561〕 saha upādisesena paññāpiyatīti saupādisesaṃ | 十八界之單元〔CSCD §520〕 | 彼篇判 asaṅkhatā pana dhātu dhammadhātuekadesova，本篇則就有餘無餘二界立其施設之由——二處相貫而論未於此明繫 |
〔CSCD §558〕 sīlādikhandhattayasaṅgahāya sammāpaṭipattiyā | 一種等之單元〔CSCD §568〕 | 彼篇引 (ma. ni. 1.462) 而以三蘊攝八支道，本篇唯出其名而不釋其攝——論不標其所指，本目誌其實不代考定 |
〔CSCD §561〕 Idaṃ dukkhanirodhaniddese vinicchayakathāmukhaṃ | 道諦之單元〔CSCD §562〕 | 次單元以 Dukkhanirodhagāminipaṭipadāniddese vuttā pana aṭṭha dhammā 逐字承之 |
七、傳本
作者、傳本與注疏源流諸問題，本編不於考據內立說。
I. Placement in the Outline
Base text This unit’s base text is CSCD (internal and not published). Every Pāli string in this layer is copied verbatim from this unit’s base-text column. The single form of location is 〔CSCD §NN〕, which can be checked word for word against that column. Because this chapter has no in-house Pāli text collated to PTS pages, no page range is recorded.
Title The base-text column carries three ### lines, all subsection titles of this unit: ### Samudayaniddesakathā・### Nirodhaniddesakathā・### Nibbānakathā. The reader-facing title of this unit takes its meaning from all three, and its extent covers all three—the section titles and the full extent of the unit are not coextensive; the fact is recorded. The three subsections measure 758／1,924／3,890 bytes (the bytes of each subsection’s own ### title line are counted in that subsection)—the third subsection is by far the largest, exceeding half the unit.
Paragraph-number domain The base-text column runs from 〔CSCD §553〕 through 〔CSCD §561〕. Nine paragraph numbers are actually present, and the sequence is continuous without a gap. This unit occupies 6,572 bytes in the base-text column.
The three subsections and the truths they explain The first subsection explains the truth of origin (the second section opened after the twelve phenomena); the second and third subsections explain the truth of cessation. The subsection on the truth of origin is only 758 bytes, while the two subsections on the truth of cessation together are 5,814 bytes—a ratio of about one to 7.7; this section records the fact without ruling on the reason.
Change of form The first and second subsections are phrase-by-phrase explanation (continuing the form of the two preceding units), while the third subsection is a discussion in objection and reply—the objector’s closing particle ce (if it is said …) occurs 12 times at word boundaries in the unit, and the Commentator’s refutation Na, (not so) 10 times, most of them clustered in the third subsection. This is the only unit among the nine units of the two chapters on bases, elements, faculties, and truths whose skeleton is objection and reply; this section records the fact.
Uneven closing formulas The first subsection closes with Ayaṃ samudayaniddese nayo. (indented two spaces), while the second and third subsections close together with Idaṃ dukkhanirodhaniddese vinicchayakathāmukhaṃ. (indented two spaces)—the two closings differ in form (the former has nayo, the latter vinicchayakathāmukhaṃ), and the second subsection has no closing of its own at its end. The fact is recorded.
Connections before and after Before it lies the unit on sorrow, lamentation, and the rest: this unit opens Samudayaniddese pana yāyaṃ taṇhāti yā ayaṃ taṇhā—taking up verbatim the preceding unit’s closing sentence Ayaṃ tāva dukkhaniddese nayo.; with pana (but, then) the treatise itself marks it as the next section opened. After it comes the unit on the truth of the path: this unit closes Idaṃ dukkhanirodhaniddese vinicchayakathāmukhaṃ., and the next unit takes it up verbatim with Dukkhanirodhagāminipaṭipadāniddese vuttā pana aṭṭha dhammā—a continuation marked by the treatise itself.
Movement The interleaf Overview assigns this unit to Movement §E, “The Truth of Origin, the Truth of Cessation, and the Discussion of Nibbāna.” The chapter sections assigned there appear verbatim in that table; this section neither repeats nor excerpts them. The paragraph-number and chapter-section systems have no known correspondence and are neither estimated nor converted.
II. Terms and Renderings
This section records only usage and location in this unit; normative readings of terms are governed by the glossary, and this section does not determine those the glossary leaves unsettled. Readings established in earlier chapters are not re-explained. Previously established terms used here include taṇhā (craving)・kāmataṇhā・bhavataṇhā・vibhavataṇhā (craving for sensuality・craving for existence・craving for non-existence)・nibbāna (nibbāna)・virāga (fading-away)・cāga (giving up)・ālayasamugghāta (uprooting of attachment)・anusaya (latent tendency)・sacca (truth)・magga (in this unit Virāgo vuccati maggo)・cetopariyañāṇa (knowledge of others’ minds)・asādhāraṇa (unshared)・nicca (permanent)・saṅkhata (conditioned)・asaṅkhata (unconditioned)・amata (deathless)・khema (security)・santa (peaceful)・upādāna (clinging)・khandha (aggregate)・kilesa (defilement)・ariyamagga (noble path)・arahatta (arahantship). Only terms newly appearing in this unit are listed below.
The four phrases of the truth of origin 〔CSCD §553〕
| Pāli | Rendering | Usage in this unit | Locus |
|---|---|---|---|
| ponobbhavikā | leading to renewed existence | the first phrase of the set formula of the truth of origin; the treatise itself explains punabbhavakaraṇaṃ punobbhavo, punobbhavo sīlametissāti | 〔CSCD §553〕 |
| punabbhava | renewed existence | the substance of the preceding phrase | 〔CSCD §553〕 |
| nandīrāgasahagatā | accompanied by delight and lust | the second phrase; the treatise itself explains that it is one with delight and lust in meaning | 〔CSCD §553〕 |
| tatra tatrābhinandinī | delighting here and there | the third phrase; the treatise itself explains yatra yatra attabhāvo nibbattati, tatra tatrābhinandinī | 〔CSCD §553〕 |
| seyyathidanti nipāto | “that is” as an indeclinable | the judgment on the fourth phrase; the treatise itself explains its meaning as “which are they?” | 〔CSCD §553〕 |
| nibbattakaṭṭha | the meaning of producing | the reason the three cravings are made one truth of origin | 〔CSCD §553〕 |
Why cessation is taught as the cessation of origin 〔CSCD §554〕
| Pāli | Rendering | Usage in this unit | Locus |
|---|---|---|---|
| samudayanirodha | cessation of origin | the pivot of this subsection; the treatise poses its own difficulty so kasmāti ce? and answers “through the cessation of origin, the cessation of suffering” | 〔CSCD §554〕 |
| sīhasamānavuttino | those who behave like lions | the simile for the Tathāgatas; in ending and teaching cessation they work on the cause | 〔CSCD §554〕 |
| suvānavuttino | those who behave like dogs | the simile for the sectarians; in ending and teaching cessation they work only on the fruit | 〔CSCD §554〕 |
| hetumhi paṭipajjanti・phale paṭipajjanti | working on the cause・working on the fruit | the meanings to which the two similes are applied | 〔CSCD §554〕 |
| attakilamathānuyogadesanā | teaching of devotion to self-torment | the example of the sectarians working on the fruit | 〔CSCD §554〕 |
The five phrases of the truth of cessation and the characteristics of nibbāna 〔CSCD §555〕–〔CSCD §556〕
| Pāli | Rendering | Usage in this unit | Locus |
|---|---|---|---|
| asesavirāganirodho | remainderless fading-away-and-cessation | the first phrase of the set formula of the truth of cessation; the treatise gives two explanations (fading-away as the path, fading-away as abandoning) | 〔CSCD §555〕 |
| paṭinissaggo | relinquishment | the third phrase | 〔CSCD §555〕 |
| mutti | release | the fourth phrase | 〔CSCD §555〕 |
| anālayo | non-attachment | the fifth phrase; the treatise itself explains kāmaguṇālayesu cettha ekopi ālayo natthi | 〔CSCD §555〕 |
| vevacana | synonym | the treatise’s judgment: the five phrases are in meaning all synonyms of nibbāna | 〔CSCD §555〕 |
| assāsakaraṇarasa | function of bringing comfort | the alternative view of the function of nibbāna | 〔CSCD §556〕 |
| nippapañcapaccupaṭṭhāna | manifestation of non-proliferation | the alternative view of the manifestation of nibbāna | 〔CSCD §556〕 |
The discussion that nibbāna is not non-existent 〔CSCD §557〕–〔CSCD §561〕
| Pāli | Rendering | Usage in this unit | Locus |
|---|---|---|---|
| sasavisāṇa | hare’s horn | the objector’s simile; nibbāna is said not to exist because, like a hare’s horn, it is undiscoverable | 〔CSCD §557〕 |
| upāyena upalabbhanīyato | because it is discoverable by means | the treatise’s refutation; nibbāna is discoverable by the means of the appropriate way of practice | 〔CSCD §557〕 |
| bālaputhujjana | foolish ordinary person | the person named in the treatise’s refutation; what the foolish ordinary person does not discover is not thereby non-existent | 〔CSCD §557〕 |
| vañjhabhāvāpajjana | becoming fruitless | the second refutation; if there were no nibbāna the right way of practice would become fruitless | 〔CSCD §558〕 |
| sammādiṭṭhipurejavā sammāpaṭipatti | the right way of practice led by right view | what the preceding refutation refers to | 〔CSCD §558〕 |
| sopādisesanibbānadhātu | nibbāna element with residue remaining | the source of the treatise’s refutation of “the non-existence of present phenomena is nibbāna” | 〔CSCD §558〕 |
| ariyamaggassa niratthakabhāvāpajjana | the noble path becoming useless | the third refutation | 〔CSCD §558〕 |
| khayo | destruction | the word of the fourth objection; the treatise refutes “destruction is nibbāna” | 〔CSCD §559〕 |
| ittarakāla | temporary | one of the faults in that refutation; if destruction were nibbāna, nibbāna would become temporary | 〔CSCD §559〕 |
| sammāvāyāmanirapekkhādhigamanīyabhāva | being attainable without regard to right effort | one of the faults in that refutation | 〔CSCD §559〕 |
| anuppattinirodha | cessation that is non-arising | the treatise’s correct account; nibbāna is the support of this destruction and is called destruction in a qualified sense | 〔CSCD §559〕 |
| atisukhuma | extremely subtle | the reason nibbāna is not stated by its own characteristic | 〔CSCD §559〕 |
| apposukkabhāvāvahana | bringing on disinclination to teach | the first proof of extreme subtlety | 〔CSCD §559〕 |
| ariyena cakkhunā passitabba | to be seen by the noble eye | the second proof of extreme subtlety | 〔CSCD §559〕 |
| maggasamaṅgī | one possessed of the path | the reason nibbāna is unshared; attained only by one possessed of the path | 〔CSCD §560〕 |
| purimakoṭiyā abhāva・appabhava | absence of a former limit・unoriginated | qualities of nibbāna; having no former limit, it has nothing from which it originates | 〔CSCD §560〕 |
| pattabba・na uppādetabba | to be attained・not to be produced | the treatise’s distinction; nibbāna is attained by the path, not produced by it | 〔CSCD §560〕 |
| ajarāmaraṇa | without aging and death | a quality of nibbāna; because it is unoriginated | 〔CSCD §560〕 |
| aṇu | atom | the other permanent thing adduced by the objector; the treatise refutes it as having no reason and its characteristic unestablished | 〔CSCD §560〕 |
| rūpasabhāvātikkamato arūpaṃ | immaterial because it transcends the nature of materiality | a quality of nibbāna | 〔CSCD §561〕 |
| ekāva niṭṭhā | one consummation only | a quality of nibbāna; the consummation of the Buddhas and the rest has no distinction | 〔CSCD §561〕 |
| upādisesa | residue remaining | the criterion of the two nibbāna elements, with and without residue | 〔CSCD §561〕 |
| saupādisesa | with residue remaining | made known by the stilling of defilements together with the residue | 〔CSCD §561〕 |
| anupādisesa | without residue remaining | made known by the non-arising of the aggregates after the final mind | 〔CSCD §561〕 |
| upahatāyatikammaphala | one whose future fruit of kamma is destroyed | a phrase of the element without residue remaining | 〔CSCD §561〕 |
| asithilaparakkamasiddha ñāṇavisesa | distinction of knowledge accomplished through unremitting endeavor | the first proof that nibbāna is attainable | 〔CSCD §561〕 |
| sabbaññuvacana | word of the Omniscient One | the second proof that nibbāna is real | 〔CSCD §561〕 |
| ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhataṃ | unborn・unbecome・unmade・unconditioned | the concluding proof cited by the treatise | 〔CSCD §561〕 |
⚠︎ Two places left open for the wise who come after (1) The compound positions of samudaya (origin) and nirodha—the two names dukkhasamudaya (origin of suffering)・dukkhanirodha (cessation of suffering) have no independent entry among the existing chapters’ entries, while the single word nirodha = cessation has been established. This section reads them as “origin of suffering” and “cessation of suffering” without establishing compound entries on its own; whether to take the single words or the compounds is left to the wise who come after. (2) The three names paṭinissagga (relinquishment)・mutti (release)・anālaya (non-attachment) are phrases of the set formula of the truth of cessation with no independent entry among the existing chapters’ entries (ālayasamugghāta = uprooting of attachment has been established; the single word ālaya has not). This section reads them as above and records that they share a root with the established ālayasamugghāta—their reading is left to the wise who come after.
III. Variant Readings
Material available This unit has no in-house Pāli text collated to PTS pages, so there is no collation passage to record. The only searchable surface is the base-text column itself. Readings are recorded, not adjudicated.
Results of a complete scan A word-for-word scan of the entire base-text column found zero occurrences of variant-note forms such as (sī.)・(syā.)・(kaṃ.)・(pī.); zero occurrences of the variant-recitation marker pāṭho; and zero occurrences of the alternative-view markers Porāṇā／porāṇā・Keci／keci・eke. Square brackets occur in only two forms (nine [§NN] paragraph numbers and eight edition-page markers, the latter all inside notes). When the search finds nothing, nothing is recorded: the base-text column itself contains no notice of a variant reading.
Quotation-mark symmetry The complete unit contains 22 occurrences of '', an even number, 11 opening and 11 closing, forming pairs throughout, with none asymmetric.
One inconsistency of parenthetical reference within this column—the same source in two forms Within 〔CSCD §559〕, the parenthetical reference to the same sutta appears twice with different abbreviations of the title: the former reads ''Yo kho, āvuso, rāgakkhayo''tiādivacanato (saṃ. ni. 4.315), the latter ''yo kho, āvuso⋯, rāgakkhayo''tiādinā (sa. ni. 4.315) nayena niddiṭṭhaṃ—the former has saṃ. ni., the latter sa. ni. (one ṃ short), while the volume and paragraph numbers of the two are identical word for word. Direct measurement in this column: saṃ. ni. occurs twice in the unit and sa. ni. once. The wording is recorded without alteration or regularization.
Scope of this column All findings above are literal facts of the base-text column; This column has not been collated against the scanned PTS pages. Zero occurrences here apply only to the single surface of the base-text column and do not support an inference about other editions.
IV. The Commentator’s Citations
Each passage cited by the Commentator is attached to a paragraph-number anchor. A source is recorded only when identified by the text itself; this column does not determine one on its behalf. Parenthetical references in “Source identified by the text itself” are copied verbatim and their titles are not translated.
| Location | Citation Formula [Verbatim] | Point Cited | Source Identified by the Text Itself |
|---|---|---|---|
| 〔CSCD §554〕 | the verse introduced by Tenāha –, ''Yathāpi mūle anupaddave daḷhe, | when the root is unharmed a felled tree grows again—when the latent tendency of craving is not uprooted, suffering arises again | (dha. pa. 338) |
| 〔CSCD §555〕 | ''Virāgā vimuccatī''ti | through fading-away one is released—the basis for fading-away as the path | (ma. ni. 1.245; saṃ. ni. 3.14) |
| 〔CSCD §559〕 | ''Yo kho, āvuso, rāgakkhayo''tiādivacanato | the destruction of lust—what the objector relies on to establish “destruction is nibbāna” | (saṃ. ni. 4.315) |
| 〔CSCD §559〕 | ''yo kho, āvuso⋯, rāgakkhayo''tiādinā⋯nayena niddiṭṭhaṃ | the same formula also states the fruit of arahantship—the treatise uses it to refute the preceding objection | (sa. ni. 4.315) |
| 〔CSCD §561〕 | Vuttañhetaṃ ''atthi, bhikkhave, ajātaṃ abhūtaṃ akataṃ asaṅkhata''nti. | there is the unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned—the concluding proof that nibbāna is real | none (the text marks the citation formula without attaching a parenthetical reference) |
Number of citation formulas [direct measurement in this column] Tenāha once・Vuttañhetaṃ once・tiādivacanato once・Yathāha・Vuttampi cetaṃ・Tena vuttaṃ・Tenetaṃ vuccati・Apare āhu・kira・Seyyathidaṃ all zero times. The text itself gives 4 parenthetical source references, distributed as saṃ. ni. 2・sa. ni. 1・ma. ni. 1・dha. pa. 1 (one entry carries two references and is counted in both totals). The unit’s final citation (the concluding proof that nibbāna is real) carries no parenthetical reference—it is the most important witness in the unit, yet its source alone is lacking; the fact is recorded without determining it on its behalf. These counts apply only to this unit, not the whole work.
One place where a verse’s parenthetical reference lies inside the citation The verse at 〔CSCD §554〕 closes with ''ti, and its parenthetical reference (dha. pa. 338); falls inside the last line of the verse (at the end of the line indented four spaces), not on a separate line—a different form from the other units, whose verse references lie outside the paragraph; the fact is recorded without moving it.
Three statements in the Commentator’s own voice (1) 〔CSCD §554〕 Evaṃ tāva dukkhanirodhassa samudayanirodhavasena desanāya payojanaṃ veditabbaṃ—the treatise itself states that what this subsection makes clear is only the purpose of teaching cessation. (2) 〔CSCD §555〕 Atthato pana sabbāneva⋯etāni nibbānassa vevacanāni—the treatise itself judges that the five phrases of the truth of cessation are in meaning all synonyms of nibbāna. (3) 〔CSCD §559〕 Sarūpeneva kasmā na vuttanti ce. Atisukhumattā—the treatise itself states the reason nibbāna is not stated by its own characteristic. All three are statements in the Commentator’s own voice; this section records their locations verbatim and does not evaluate them.
V. Similes and Rhetoric
This section records only the location of each simile and what it is applied to; it makes no literary evaluation.
A. Similes In this unit the word-boundary form viya occurs twice, word-boundary iva zero times, the sandhi comparative form zero times, and forms of sadisa zero times—both occurrences are in the first paragraph of the discussion that nibbāna is not non-existent 〔CSCD §557〕; the subsection on the truth of origin and the phrase-by-phrase subsection on the truth of cessation contain not a single simile. There are also two similes applied directly by the name of the comparison rather than with viya: the lion and the dog at 〔CSCD §554〕 (Sīhasamānavuttino hi tathāgatā・Suvānavuttino pana titthiyā) and the verse on the root in the same paragraph (Yathāpi mūle anupaddave daḷhe, introduced by Yathāpi).
| Location | Simile | Meaning to Which It Is Applied |
|---|---|---|
| 〔CSCD §554〕 | Sīhasamānavuttino hi tathāgatā | the Tathāgatas behave like lions—attacking the one who shot rather than chasing the arrow, working on the cause |
| 〔CSCD §554〕 | Suvānavuttino pana titthiyā | the sectarians behave like dogs—chasing what was thrown, working on the fruit |
| 〔CSCD §554〕 | ''Yathāpi mūle anupaddave daḷhe, with Chinnopi rukkho punadeva rūhati; | when the root is firm and unharmed a felled tree grows again—when the latent tendency of craving is not uprooted, suffering arises again |
| 〔CSCD §557〕 | sasavisāṇaṃ viya anupalabbhanīyatoti ce? | the objector’s simile: nibbāna undiscoverable like a hare’s horn |
| 〔CSCD §557〕 | cetopariyañāṇena paresaṃ lokuttaracittaṃ viya | the treatise’s refutation: as the supramundane mind of others is known through the knowledge of others’ minds, nibbāna too is discoverable by means |
B. Verifiable rhetorical observations (1) The unit’s skeleton is the form of objection and reply: the word-boundary ce occurs 12 times in the unit and the Commentator’s refutation Na, 10 times—twelve rounds of objection and reply, ten of them refuted directly with Na,, the remaining two refuted in other words (Atisukhumattā and Samudayanirodhena dukkhanirodho). This density is the highest among the nine units of the two chapters on bases, elements, faculties, and truths. (2) Questions occur 3 times: so kasmāti ce? (〔CSCD §554〕)・Nattheva nibbānaṃ, sasavisāṇaṃ viya anupalabbhanīyatoti ce? (〔CSCD §557〕)・Apica nibbānaṃ natthīti na vattabbaṃ, kasmā? (〔CSCD §558〕)—all three questions are posed by the Commentator on behalf of the objector. (3) The cue Tattha occurs zero times—the unit does not use the framework of analysis. (4) The abbreviation …pe… occurs zero times. (5) There is one verse of 4 lines (the verse on the root, indented four spaces)—one of the units with the least verse among the nine units of the two chapters on bases, elements, faculties, and truths. (6) No indented block of cited teaching. (7) The unit contains no narrative example involving a person; its similes compare things or animals. (8) Closing formulas occur twice (Ayaṃ samudayaniddese nayo.・Idaṃ dukkhanirodhaniddese vinicchayakathāmukhaṃ.) while the unit has three subsections—one subsection has no closing of its own (see Section I).
All counts above are direct measurements applying only to this unit, not the whole work.
VI. Intratextual Cross-Reading
Every pointer carries a paragraph-number anchor. Each target is established only from names and statements verifiable in this unit—no correspondence is known between this unit’s paragraph-number and chapter-section systems, so the pointers do not attach chapter sections, estimate, or convert them. This column does not determine them on another source’s behalf.
| Place in This Unit | Target | Verifiable Basis |
|---|---|---|
〔CSCD §553〕 Kāmataṇhā bhavataṇhā vibhavataṇhāti imā paṭiccasamuppādaniddese āvibhavissanti | chapter on dependent arising | the treatise itself names the chapter to which it refers (paṭiccasamuppādaniddese) and itself marks it as to be stated later (āvibhavissanti)—this is the only forward pointer in the unit that explicitly names a chapter |
〔CSCD §553〕 Samudayaniddese pana yāyaṃ taṇhāti | unit on the general account of the four truths 〔CSCD §537〕 | the set formula of the truth of origin cited there as (vibha. 203) is there verbatim; this unit explains it phrase by phrase |
〔CSCD §555〕 tassāyeva taṇhāyāti and the explanation of the five phrases that follow | unit on the general account of the four truths 〔CSCD §537〕 | the set formula of the truth of cessation cited there as (vibha. 204) reads asesavirāganirodho cāgo paṭinissaggo mutti anālayo; this unit explains it phrase by phrase—that unit gives the citation, this unit explains the words |
〔CSCD §556〕 Tayidaṃ santilakkhaṇaṃ, accutirasaṃ, assāsakaraṇarasaṃ vā, animittapaccupaṭṭhānaṃ, nippapañcapaccupaṭṭhānaṃ vā | unit on the general account of the four truths 〔CSCD §532〕 | that unit has Santilakkhaṇaṃ⋯nirodhasaccaṃ, accutirasaṃ, animittapaccupaṭṭhānaṃ—the same three headings, but this unit adds an alternative view to each (introduced by vā); this section records the fact without ruling |
〔CSCD §561〕 saha upādisesena paññāpiyatīti saupādisesaṃ | unit on the eighteen elements 〔CSCD §520〕 | that unit judges asaṅkhatā pana dhātu dhammadhātuekadesova, while this unit establishes the basis of designation for the two elements, with and without residue—the two passages run together, though the treatise does not explicitly link them here |
〔CSCD §558〕 sīlādikhandhattayasaṅgahāya sammāpaṭipattiyā | unit on singlefold and the rest 〔CSCD §568〕 | that unit cites (ma. ni. 1.462) and includes the eight factors of the path in the three aggregates, while this unit gives only the name without explaining the inclusion—the treatise does not mark what it refers to; this section records the fact without determining it |
〔CSCD §561〕 Idaṃ dukkhanirodhaniddese vinicchayakathāmukhaṃ | unit on the truth of the path 〔CSCD §562〕 | the next unit takes it up verbatim with Dukkhanirodhagāminipaṭipadāniddese vuttā pana aṭṭha dhammā |
VII. Transmission
This edition takes no position in its apparatus on questions of authorship, textual transmission, or the lineages of the commentaries.