Teacher classes | Text of the Vocabulary 30
Loading video player...
As we said yesterday, if we thought that "if we say it, it's defaming the Buddha, we can't fully understand my secret," that's the way you say it.
If anyone says anything about the Buddha or the Buddhas of the Third, they are already slandering the Buddha. There may be no doubt about those who have a deeper understanding of the law. However, those who had previously had little thought or knowledge of the true meaning of the concept may have some doubts about it:
" Why does it happen when it is written in the Buddha that Mujahideen-Niv turned the three-wheeler, and the three-wheeler didn't say anything? " This is true in its true sense. To be honest, we cannot admit that there is a real turnover, nor can there be a turnover. These are all non-existent and non-existent purposes of conversion. So why is Buddha here saying, "If someone says Buddha's words, it's slanderous?"
It is undeniable, and it is not here to break this view, that the unselfish and dreamless world has turned three times to the French wheel, and has become one of the most varied.
So it should be understood that this is true.
Whether it's a hyena, or a hyena, or a hyena, it's all the same. But what about the phantoms of the dream? It's not. It would therefore be useful to understand in that regard.
"The Buddha, the teller, cannot speak, is a name."
It's the same as before.
In the Polomies of the King of the Congo, one of the first things to be done is the victory and secularism of the Middle. It should be made clear that, since then, many of the issues have been different from each other, and each of the issues raised has different characteristics. Other than that, the issues are essentially the same and there is no difference.
As a result, Muiga-Niv told Shao-Tyaw: "The teller, can't say." Proponents, such as Mujahideen-Nife, or some other neighbour, are the tellers.
In the best of truths, there is practically nothing to say. The law in question does not exist, the author does not exist, and the living beings that have been subjected to it do not exist. It can be described as a statement, not as a statement. Nothing means nothing, here's what it means.
Why do you say that? There is no real sense in the truth: "I'm going to live, I'm going to turn, I'm going to turn, I'm going to have a family," none of that. So, how could there be an advocate? There's also a dream that can be seen in famous words.
So that's what it says in the Book of Golden Light: "The Buddha is nothing, and I'm here to say that there's a good thing about it. "It means that there is no difference between the Buddha and the idea that there are 12 of them. Since there is no idea at all, the author is not. The author is not established, and relying on what the author says does not exist in truth. The author does not exist, nor does the law in question, which is what is said in the famous phrase.
So, in the face of the chaos of the living, and in order to break my faith as if it were a dream, the Queen has spoken twelve scriptures in the presence of the living, and indeed has not said it.
Like the teachings we quoted earlier: "I did not say a word from the day I began to become a Buddha, until the day I ended up a nihil. "That's the reason why the Buddha says that. We've already cited a lot of teachings before, so we don't have to do that here. It means that if anyone says Buddha, it's a big slander. Why? Nothing can be said or said in the true truth, so we cannot admit it in the truest truth. But in the famous words, the world has turned the wheel in the face of different human beings.
It is reasonable and reasonable to declare 84 thousand for the sake of healing 84 thousand.
尔时,慧命须菩提白佛言:“世尊,颇有众生,于未来世,闻说是法,生信心不?”
佛言:“须菩提,彼非众生,非不众生。何以故?须菩提,众生众生者。如来说非众生,是名众生。”
以前从来没有听过胜义谛和世俗谛关系的一些人,一念《金刚经》的时候,他的心里可能产生很多怀疑:“到底是众生不是众生,众生众
生非众生到底在说什么?”听说如来的《金刚经》意义很深,意义一点都不深,好像是这个人不是这个人,全是矛盾一样。稍微真正对中观和般若经有所了解的人,一看到这里所讲的真是很深的,很有意思的。这里说,当时“慧命须菩提”,“慧命须菩提”是对须菩提的一种称呼。
须菩提在佛面前请求说,“世尊,颇有众生,于未来世”——很多的众生在未来末法五百年的时候,“闻说是法,生信心不?”
他说:“世尊,未来成千上万的众生听了《金刚经》以后,是不是很多人对《金刚经》生起很大的信心呢?”这样提出这个问题。
提出这个问题的时候,世尊没有对须菩提好好地回答,却说:“须菩提,不是众生就不是不是众生。”
当时回答的时候,本来须菩提问释迦牟尼佛未来时候有没有众生对《金刚经》生信心?世尊给他回答的时候说:“不是众生就不是不是众生。何以故?须菩提,众生众生者,如来说非众生,是名众生。”
所谓的众生,如来早已经说过,非众生就是众生。如果对《般若经》的深义没有了解,好像是到底怎么回答的?有些新闻记者在问一些官员,他答不出来的时候,就说其他的一个问题,会不会是这样的?实际上并不是这样的。这里的意思我们应该明白。刚才须菩提问世尊:未来的时候有没有很多众生对《金刚般若波罗蜜经》生起极大的信心而获得受益?是这样问的。
世尊给他回答的时候,当然前面已经讲过,将来末法五百年的时候,有成千上万的众生对《金刚经》生起信心。这一点如来全部知道,全部见到的。前面这个问题已经回答了,如来的尽所有智和如所有智完全都能见到。未来很多众生对《金刚经》生起信心和闻思修行,这个过程见得非常清楚,在名言当中肯定是有的,这没有什么可说的,肯定是有的。
但是在这里回答的时候,未来的众生生信心者实际上是不存在的。主要回答这个问题。
刚才说未来的很多众生是不是对《金刚经》生很大的信心?当时说未来生信心的众生如果存在的话,在胜义当中来说可以承认众生对《金刚经》生起信心。但是,未来的众生真正观察的时候,并不是众生——“非众生非不众生”,也可以说胜义当中的不是众生的本性,不是非众生。
意思就是说,众生的本性在名言当中可以有一个如幻如梦的假立的众生。但是在真正的实相当中来说,所谓的众生完全是不成立的。
佛经当中有这样一个教证:“犹如依支聚,可称为车轮,如是依蕴聚,世俗名众生。”犹如依靠支分或分支,可以称为众生。真正的实相当中,所谓的众生确实是不存在的。
这种不存在用一个比喻来说明:比如依靠一些支体可以假立为车轮,但是车轮实际上也是不存在的。
同样的道理,依靠一些蕴聚,五蕴的聚合,在世俗当中叫众生,但实际上也不是真正的众生。
根据这个教证,真正的众生是不存在的。
《宝鬘论》当中也是这样讲的:“如削芭蕉树,支分尽无实,士夫析六界,无实亦同彼。” 意思是说,分析芭蕉树的时候一点也是不存在的,士夫或众生全部是异名。在《入中论》当中也是这样讲的,只是不同的名字。
所谓的士夫就像削芭蕉树一样。如果我们去分析,以地、水、火、风、虚空等六界去分析,一点也是不存在的。因此,所谓的众生就像是削芭蕉树一样,在如幻如梦当中好像众生是存在的,但是真正观察的时候,所谓的众生也是不存在的。
昨天的《上师心滴》中讲到:“被无明烦恼所障蔽,未如实了达真如之义的士夫为众生,反之则非众生。”好像昨天刚讲了无垢光尊者的教言。意思是:现在正在轮回当中的众生,以无明烦恼所逼,没有如实了达真如的本义,在真如上有一定的障碍,这种障碍具足的时候可以叫众生,一旦把这个障碍已经离开,那不叫众生了,因此所谓的众生是不存在的。
如果众生不存在,那么对《金刚经》生起信心,或者是对《金刚经》闻思修行,这样在实相中也是不存在的。
名言当中前面也讲了,后面也还要讲。依靠
《金刚经》成千上万个众生生起信心,对它供养、恭敬、顶礼、念诵、受持等等,这样的话,获得无上的功德,这一点是没有什么可说的。
但是真正在胜义中讲,就像刚才佛经当中说的,龙猛菩萨和无垢光尊者说的那样,所谓的众生一点也是不存在的。
还有记得《三摩王经》中有一个很好的教证,但是我现在好像背不下来,你们以后也可以看看《三摩王经》,依靠梦幻的比喻,也有很好的比喻。
所以众生不存在的原因就是这样,这个问题已经讲完了。
须菩提白佛言:“世尊,佛得阿耨多罗三藐三菩提,为无所得耶?”
佛言:“如是,如是。须菩提,我于阿耨多罗三藐三菩提,乃至无有少法可得,是名阿耨多罗三藐三菩提。”
这里是这样讲的。须菩提又在佛面前请求说:
“世尊,佛陀得无上圆满正等觉菩提,那么是不是无有所得呢?”
佛在究竟实相上来讲,真正的无上正等觉,获得不共同的智慧。比如十种力、各种相好和语言、身语意的各种功德,是不是无法可得呢?没有什么可得呢?这样来提出问题的。
这样提出问题的时候,佛陀很欢喜,也赞叹须菩提的语言和境界。他说:“如是,如是,须菩提。”他说,真的是这样的,这样没有错。在真正的了义实相当中来说,所谓的无上圆满正等觉,一点也是没有得的。
“乃至没有少法可得”,没有少法可得,就像《中论》中所讲的那样:“轮回与涅槃,无有少差别。”轮回和涅槃一点差别也没有。
究竟的实相来说,佛陀连一点法也没有什么可得的,也没有什么可取的。龙猛菩萨在《中论》中也说:“无弃亦无得,不断亦不常,不生亦不灭,是说名涅槃。”一点也是没有得的,一点也是没有达到的,还有“不常不断、不生不灭”,这就是涅槃。
所谓真正涅槃,在究竟实相中也没有什么可得的。这是无垢光尊者在《大圆满心性休息》第八品中也讲到的。意思就是:究竟的实相中,佛陀所得的法是不存在的,因此一点也没有什么可得的。
前面也有这样的道理。但是嘎玛拉西拉说:
“前面是有学道而言的,有学道中佛陀的如来正等觉也没有什么可得的。这里是从无学道的功德而言,如来正等觉不可思议的功德,在究竟实相上没有什么可得的。”应该这样理解。
“复次,须菩提,是法平等,无有高下,是名阿耨多罗三藐三菩提。”
从显现和空性方面来看也是平等的。以前教证也引用过,当时引用的好像是《维摩诘经》,其他法师讲经的时候也是引用过,说是《维摩诘经》当中的,也许《维摩诘经》当中也是有。
这里说:“须菩提,你应该明白,一切诸法无论是显现还是空性,或者是它的相状,以及众生和佛陀方面来说,全部是平等的。”
《华严经》中也是这样讲的:“我与一切佛,自性平等故。”我们好像以前在麦彭仁波切的《大幻化网光明藏论》中也引用过。我和一切佛自性全部是平等性的,没有什么高下。从实相上来看,释迦牟尼佛的境界和我的境界,从实相上讲没有什么差别,地狱和涅槃也应该是平等的。
还有《大乘起信论》中也说:“一切法从本已来,离言说相,离名字相,离心缘相,毕竟平等,无有变异。”所以从《大乘起信论》的观点来说也是,一切诸法从远离名相方面、远离戏论方面、远离法相方面,全部是平等的,没有什么高下,也没有什么不平等的。下面这个教证《大幻化网》当中也已经引用过,《澄清宝珠论》当中也是引用过,还有其他的《日光疏》当中也引用过。
《五次第论》当中也说:“显现及空性,精通各分已,何处成一体,彼名为双运。”显现和空性什么时候相合就叫做双运,双运就是平等的意思,显空双运就是显空平等。什么时候显现即是空性,空性即是显现,这种境界就是无有高下的平等。
龙猛菩萨也这样讲:“显现与空性,一旦有合时,应为双运相。”是不是这样?大概是这样吧。
听课笔记
登录后可记录与自动保存听课笔记 去登录

