Dharma · AI Companion

有餘涅槃

sopadhiśeṣanirvāṇa

烦恼已尽而余依身仍存的涅槃。AI-generated

Type AttainmentDifficulty AdvancedTruth-level span I · dependent arising ⇢ IV · beyond wordsInitial AI estimate · evolves with use

〔判教镜头〕声闻以烦恼尽而余依身存为有余涅槃(1);唯识以真如出烦恼障正面重释,通于离言(4)。并列不裁决。

A Contemporary ReadingAI-generated

What this concept is saying

"有餘涅槃" (sopadhiśeṣanirvāṇa, "nirvāṇa with remainder") is most easily misheard as an incomplete nirvāṇa: as if some afflictions were left over, hence "with remainder." Quite the opposite. According to the judgment of the *Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra* (《大智度論》, T1509), what establishes nirvāṇa with remainder is precisely that all afflictions (煩惱, kleśa) have already been extinguished; what "remainder" refers to is the fruit of the five aggregates (五眾, pañcaskandha), produced by past causes and conditions, still in operation.

In one sentence: The cause—afflictions—is ended; the fruit—the five aggregates—remains.

The *Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra* compares the five aggregates to a heavy burden, because the entire psychophysical process of form, feeling, perception, volition, and consciousness is the support on which suffering arises and manifests. Abandoning the burden has two levels:

- "Abandoning the causes and conditions of the five aggregates—the afflictions" is nirvāṇa with remainder. - "Abandoning the fruit of the five aggregates" is nirvāṇa without remainder (無餘涅槃, nirupadhiśeṣanirvāṇa).

Here especially one must read the two characters "因緣" (causes and conditions) accurately. The treatise explicitly states it means "the afflictions," and it cannot be broadened into the claim that all physiological, psychological, and environmental conditions have vanished. A person who has realized nirvāṇa with remainder still has eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, and mind; still sees, hears, walks, speaks, and eats; and may still age and fall ill. But the afflictions that drive greedy grasping, aversive rejection, deluded entanglement, and the continuation of future suffering have been extinguished.

"The fruit of the five aggregates still remains" also cannot be shrunk to "the physical body is still here." What the *Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra* speaks of here is the five aggregates, not only the form aggregate:

- 色眾 (rūpa-skandha, the form aggregate): all four great elements (四大, mahābhūta) and the matter derived from them, including the body and also the material realm experienced; it cannot be translated only as "physical body." - 受眾 (vedanā-skandha, the feeling aggregate): the pleasant, unpleasant, and neutral feelings that arise when contacting objects; it is the tone of experience, not equivalent to an emotional narrative. - 想眾 (saṃjñā-skandha, the perception aggregate): apprehending characteristics of objects, recognizing, and labeling—for example, recognizing that this is a sound, that this is an acquaintance; not unbounded "thoughts" or fantasies. - 行眾 (saṃskāra-skandha, the formation aggregate): volition, tendencies, and various mental constructions other than feeling and perception; it cannot be narrowed to physical "actions" performed by the body. - 識眾 (vijñāna-skandha, the consciousness aggregate): the activity of discerning and knowing that arises dependent on faculties and their objects, such as eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, and so on; not a permanent soul hiding behind body and mind.

Therefore, nirvāṇa with remainder is not a person becoming a senseless hollow shell; rather, the five aggregates continue to manifest as usual, but are no longer taken over by ignorance (無明, avidyā) and craving-clinging (愛取, tṛṣṇā-upādāna). A contemporary analogy may help: the machine is still running, but the program that ceaselessly processes experience into "I must possess," "I must reject," "this can prove who I am" has been stopped at its root. This analogy only illustrates the distinction of "functions still present, afflictions not arising"; it does not mean the mind equals a computer, let alone use artificial intelligence to prove the Dharma.

The difference between nirvāṇa with and without remainder is also not "one has cut off afflictions, the other has not cut them cleanly." According to the structure of the *Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra* here, neither should be understood as having afflictions remaining; the difference lies in:

- Nirvāṇa with remainder: afflictions already abandoned; the presently existing fruit of the five aggregates not yet abandoned. - Nirvāṇa without remainder: the fruit of the five aggregates also abandoned; there is no further continuation of this suffering-fruit.

This shows that nirvāṇa with remainder occupies a very clear position on the path of liberation: it is not an occasional tranquil experience in early practice, nor a temporary meditative absorption, but the fruit of liberation after the defilements are cut. Ethics (戒, śīla), concentration (定, samādhi), wisdom (慧, prajñā), and various terms for severing the fetters (斷結, saṃyojana-prahāṇa) can illuminate the cultivation lineage leading to liberation; but because they appear in adjacent discussions, one must not equate every meditative absorption, every severing of a fetter, or every pure experience with nirvāṇa with remainder.

The related narratives in the *Saṃyuktāgama* (《雜阿含經》, T0099) adopt a different mode of expression. After the venerable Nigrodhakappa (尼拘律想) attained parinirvāṇa through illness, Vaṅgīśa (婆耆舍) reflected: "Has my teacher attained nirvāṇa with remainder or nirvāṇa without remainder?" This passage demonstrates that "nirvāṇa with remainder / nirvāṇa without remainder" is a pair of terms used to distinguish the circumstances of parinirvāṇa, but it does not directly explain in that passage what the "remainder" is, nor does it determine in the given passage which kind the venerable attained. Therefore, the explanation "abandoning the causes and conditions of the five aggregates—the afflictions" should be clearly attributed to the *Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra*, and cannot be backfilled as the explicit definition of this *Saṃyuktāgama* passage itself.

Similarly, the *Saṃyuktāgama* uses the blazing heat of a heated iron ball gradually subsiding, its destination unknown, as a simile for the liberated person whose streams are forever cut off, finally saying "having attained the trace of the unmoved, one enters nirvāṇa without remainder." This simile clearly falls on the side of nirvāṇa without remainder, and cannot be loosely borrowed to describe nirvāṇa with remainder. Nor does it hint that a soul, like fire, went to some mysterious place; "its destination is unknown / where it went is not known" precisely prevents one from placing the liberated person after death into the usual imaginings of "existing, being annihilated, or relocating somewhere."

A walkthrough in daily life

Imagine a person who has been fully liberated riding the subway during morning rush hour. This hypothetical is not saying that an ordinary person who occasionally calms down has attained nirvāṇa with remainder, but uses a familiar scene to see clearly, layer by layer: after afflictions are extinguished, why the five aggregates can still operate.

The carriage is crowded, the lights are glaring, the handrail is cold, and announcements and phone ringtones rise and fall. The material conditions on which the body, carriage, lights, and sounds depend all fall within the scope of form (色, rūpa). Here form cannot be mapped only onto "his body"; the external material realm must not be omitted either. Liberation has not made the carriage, the body, or the senses vanish into thin air.

The train suddenly brakes, the body loses balance, and a pang of pain comes from the ankle. This unpleasant feeling belongs to feeling (受, vedanā). Feeling is the reception of pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral experience; it is not the entire chain of interpretation "today is really unlucky, everyone is offending me." Attaining nirvāṇa with remainder does not mean the nervous system stops transmitting pain, nor that all experience becomes pleasant; the fruit of the five aggregates remains, and painful feeling can still be experienced as painful feeling.

He recognizes "the train braked suddenly," "my ankle hurts," "there is a child beside me"—this is the apprehending of characteristics and identification of the perception aggregate (想眾, saṃjñā-skandha). The public most often mistranslates the perception aggregate as "thoughts in the head"; in fact, recognizing colors, sounds, people, and danger all involve apprehending characteristics. A liberated person has not lost the ability to recognize; otherwise daily action and teaching could not stand.

Next, intentions and mental constructions appear in the mind such as steadying the body, avoiding knocking into others, and giving up a seat to an elderly person—this is the domain of the formation aggregate (行眾, saṃskāra-skandha). Formations are not only external actions already performed; volition, tendencies, initiation, and construction themselves are the key. Afflictions being extinguished does not mean all intentional activity disappears, but that these activities are no longer driven by greed, aversion, and delusion, no longer weaving karmic entanglement around a "self" that must be defended and expanded.

Eye-consciousness arises from the eye and forms, ear-consciousness from the ear and sounds, body-consciousness from the body and tangible objects—this is the continued operation of the consciousness aggregate (識眾, vijñāna-skandha). Consciousness is not a permanent observer, but a process of knowing that manifests dependent on faculties and objects. At this moment all five aggregates are present, hence "with remainder"; but the crowding is not appended with "why is everyone crowding me," the pain is not magnified into "I absolutely cannot bear it," and giving up the seat is not clung to as "I am such a noble person."

Here is the finest and most crucial cut: experience still occurs; afflictive appropriation no longer occurs. Pain can appear; the craving-clinging that weaves pain into a self-entrapment has ceased.

Now switch to the scenario of scrolling a phone. The screen and the body are form (色). The pleasant feeling at praise and the unpleasant feeling at criticism are feeling (受). Recognizing the avatar, the text, and the tone is perception (想). The tendency to keep refreshing, to counterattack, to show off, or to care is formation (行). The corresponding seeing, hearing, knowing, and sensing are consciousness (識). The ordinary person's chain often slides rapidly toward: "This message concerns my worth, so I must seize the praise and eliminate the criticism." Nirvāṇa with remainder does not black out the screen, the text, the feelings, and the cognition; rather, afflictive clinging has been severed at the root.

However, we cannot judge that a person has attained nirvāṇa with remainder merely because they did not answer back and their face was calm. Suppression, numbness, exhaustion, social training, and temporary stillness in meditation can all produce similar appearances. What the classical definition requires is not a momentary absence of eruption, but that the afflictions have been extinguished. Surface behavior can only offer extremely limited clues and cannot replace the standard of having cut off the defilements.

Why contemporary people need it

Contemporary people often swing between two imaginings.

One imagining: freedom means tuning all life conditions to satisfaction—the body always healthy, relationships always smooth, work unhindered, no criticism online, emotions only pleasant. So people keep optimizing the external environment, only to find that the larger the scope of control, the larger the scope of fearing loss of control.

Another imagining: since the external environment cannot be controlled, then feel nothing at all—train oneself to be cold, detached, and without needs. Thus "letting go" is misused as avoidance, "emptiness" (空, śūnyatā) is misused as numbness, and "nirvāṇa" is misused as exiting life.

Nirvāṇa with remainder corrects both extremes at once. It tells us that what Buddhism calls liberation does not aim at eliminating all psychophysical experience while alive; what truly must cease is affliction—the ignorant appropriation of the five aggregates and the continuation of craving-clinging set in motion by it. The body will age, painful feelings may occur, memory and recognition keep operating, and the intention to care for others can also arise. Liberation is not outside experience; it is experience no longer grasped as "I" (我, ātman) and "mine" (我所, ātmīya).

This also makes the direction of practice testable. When we face overtime work, parenting, illness, or conflict in intimate relationships, we need not first ask: "How do I make all discomfort disappear?" We can ask more deeply:

- Which kind of form, feeling, perception, formation, or consciousness is actually occurring before me right now? - Beyond the painful feeling, what identity-narrative have I added? - Which momentary condition have I mistaken for a self that must be maintained? - Does my reaction come from clarity, compassion, and appropriate judgment, or from greed (貪, rāga), hostility (瞋, dveṣa), and ignorance (癡, moha)?

These observations do not amount to having already attained nirvāṇa with remainder, but they align practice with the problem it truly addresses. Nirvāṇa is not an advanced version of emotion-management technique; ethics, concentration, and wisdom are not merely for making people more efficiently adapted to stress. The path of liberation points to the cessation of the very root of affliction, not merely packaging affliction more presentably.

The *Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra* further says that at the moment of realization, the afflictions are extinguished, hence one obtains nirvāṇa with remainder; and from the perspective of making offerings and planting merit, it calls such a person a "fixed field of merit" (畢定福田, niyata-puṇya-kṣetra). But the treatise immediately adds: "Because all dharmas share the nature of nirvāṇa without remainder, it is said there is no fixed field of merit." These two layers must be read together: from worldly convention and the merit of cultivation, the liberated person is a definitive field of merit; from the deeper point that all dharmas lack fixed self-nature, one cannot freeze "field of merit" into a self-subsistent, eternally unchanging identity. True wisdom both respects distinctions in cultivation and does not reify any nominal designation.

Common misreadings and clarifications

Misreading one: "With remainder" means some afflictions are left over.

No. According to the *Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra*, what nirvāṇa with remainder abandons is precisely "the causes and conditions of the five aggregates—the afflictions." What remains is the fruit of the five aggregates, not residual afflictions. If afflictions have not yet been extinguished, one cannot be said to have attained nirvāṇa with remainder merely on the basis of calmness, clarity, or special experiences.

Misreading two: Nirvāṇa with remainder is just "the body is still alive."

Not accurate enough. The fruit of the five aggregates includes the ongoing operation of form, feeling, perception, formation, and consciousness, not only the flesh. If one says only "the body is still here," one would mistakenly think the liberated person has only physiological functions, without feeling, recognition, intention, and knowing; this both narrows the five aggregates and misreads liberation as mental blankness.

Misreading three: Nirvāṇa with remainder is a half-finished product; only nirvāṇa without remainder counts as true liberation.

This misses the decisive fact that "afflictions have already been extinguished." The difference between the two lies not in whether the defilements have been qualifiedly cut, but in whether the presently existing fruit of the five aggregates still remains. One may say the objects abandoned differ, but one should not demote nirvāṇa with remainder to a secondary consolation in which afflictions still exist.

Misreading four: Nirvāṇa without remainder is a soul leaving the body and entering an eternal world.

The sources do not say this. The *Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra* speaks of abandoning the fruit of the five aggregates; the *Saṃyuktāgama*'s heated iron ball simile says that after the blazing heat ceases, "its destination is not known," and uses this to illustrate the side of nirvāṇa without remainder. Interpreting it as the soul moving house is stuffing back into nirvāṇa the entity-imagination that Buddhism dismantles.

Misreading five: Nirvāṇa without remainder is total annihilation—nothing at all.

This is equally hasty. The classics' "where it went is not known" is not endorsing "after death, nothing exists"; it is refusing to frame liberation with the usual framework of asking where an entity "went, whether it still exists." If one first assumes a permanent self and then asks whether it is eternal or destroyed, the question itself already imports premises the classics do not recognize.

Misreading six: As long as one lives a Buddhist-flavored, emotionally stable life, that is nirvāṇa with remainder.

Emotional stability may come from maturity, but also from suppression, dullness, favorable circumstances, or temporary meditative absorption. The yardstick of nirvāṇa with remainder is the extinction of afflictions, not a gentle temperament, let alone the internet-context "whatever." True non-greed is not pretending not to want because one cannot get it; true non-aversion is not having anger but not daring to express it; true non-delusion is not refusing to analyze complex reality.

Misreading seven: Nirvāṇa with remainder means no longer acting, no longer caring about the world.

The five aggregates remain, so recognition, intention, and appropriate action can all occur. What ceases is afflictive construction, not all functions. Selfless care, clear judgment, and necessary refusal are not cancelled because there is no self-grasping. On the contrary, when one is no longer busy protecting a fictional self-center, action can be less distorted.

**Misreading eight: The *Saṃyuktāgama* already explicitly says in the relevant question that the "remainder" is the five aggregates.**

No. That passage only raises the question of distinguishing "nirvāṇa with remainder / nirvāṇa without remainder." The explicit distinction between "abandoning the causes and conditions of the five aggregates—the afflictions" and "abandoning the fruit of the five aggregates" is made by the *Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra*. The two sources can be read in mutual reference, but one must preserve the textual boundary of what each says and does not say.

Misreading nine: "Fixed field of merit" is a fixed entity-attribute possessed by the liberated person.

The *Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra* on the one hand calls the one who attains nirvāṇa with remainder a "fixed field of merit," and on the other hand, from "all dharmas share the nature of nirvāṇa without remainder," says "there is no fixed field of merit." Taking only the former reifies the merit-designation; taking only the latter flattens the conventional meaning of cultivation and offering. The middle-way reading is that neither layer is cancelled.

In the final analysis, nirvāṇa with remainder asks us to see an extremely profound possibility: one need not wait for the body to disappear, the world to go silent, or feeling to stop, in order to be liberated from affliction. The five aggregates still operate according to conditions, but the grasping that made them a burden has ceased.

This is precisely its significance on the entire path of liberation. Practice is not deleting life-experience item by item, but guarding with ethics (戒, śīla), abiding with concentration (定, samādhi), and seeing things as they truly are with wisdom (慧, prajñā), until the afflictions that cause the continuation of suffering no longer arise. At that point, what remains is not a person crushed hollow, but a psychophysical process no longer possessed by self-grasping (我執, ātmagrāha); there is seeing, hearing, knowing, and sensing, yet no hunger to establish a self through them; there is life within conditions, yet one is no longer dragged back by conditions into the turning of affliction.

For the electronic texts of the scriptures, see [《大智度论》](https://cbetaonline.dila.edu.tw/zh/T1509) and [《杂阿含经》](https://cbetaonline.dila.edu.tw/zh/T0099) as collected in CBETA.

Canonical EntryAI-generated

一、定义与核心要义

有餘涅槃,是《大智度論》所说已经舍离五众之因缘即诸烦恼,而尚未舍离五众之果的涅槃;《雜阿含經》所给材料则仅将它作为与「無餘涅槃」相对的分类术语,并未直接解释「所余」为何。

其核心要义在《大智度論》中表现为「因尽而果犹存」:五众能生苦恼,故譬如重担;有餘涅槃所舍的是造成五众相续与苦恼的「五眾因緣——諸煩惱」,无餘涅槃所舍的才是「五眾果」。因此,有餘涅槃并非说证得之时五众立即消失,而是以烦恼已灭为成立的关键。

二、主要阐述

《大智度論》从五众的因果结构分判二种涅槃。五众是苦恼所依,因而被称为重担;舍此重担又有先后:先舍五众的因缘,即诸烦恼,是有餘涅槃;后舍五众之果,是无餘涅槃。这里的「因緣」由论文明定为「諸煩惱」,不宜泛化为一切条件。此说清楚显示,有餘涅槃中断除的是烦恼,现存五众之果则尚未舍去。

同论另一处直接说,于「證時」诸烦恼灭,故「得有餘涅槃」,与「舍五众因缘」的说法相互呼应。论中又由受供植福的角度,称得有餘涅槃者为「畢定福田」。然而随即又说:「諸法同無餘涅槃性,故說無畢定福田。」因此,原论同时保留「畢定福田」与「無畢定福田」两层表述:前者就得有餘涅槃者而言,后者就诸法同无餘涅槃性而言,不应把其中任何一句割裂为具有固定自性的单一判定。

《大智度論》还在相邻论述中列举断惑解脱的修证语汇:诸佛以禅定、智慧摧折五欲之刺,灭断下五分结;「有分結盡」称为断上分五结;又以与诸法实相、金刚三昧相应的智慧,断一切烦恼及习,而说「正智、得解脫」。这些语句展示了该论描述断惑、智慧与解脱的方式,但原文并未把其中每一修证名目逐项等同于有餘涅槃,故只能作为其论述脉络记录。

《雜阿含經》的着重点不同。尼拘律想尊者因病般涅槃、舍利受供后,婆耆舍思惟其和尚究竟是「有餘涅槃」还是「無餘涅槃」,并向佛求其相。所给原文块仅提出辨相问题,未说明有餘究竟余何物,也未载明尼拘律想属于哪一种。因此,此处能确定的是二者构成一组用来辨别般涅槃情形的术语,不能把《大智度論》的五众因果解释反填为该段经文本身的明文定义。

三、不同部类与译本的表述差异

阿含部《雜阿含經》直接使用「有餘涅槃/無餘涅槃」这一对称形式,未在相关段落中改称「有餘依涅槃」,也没有定义「餘」的内容。同经偈颂另见「捨一切有餘,得無餘寂滅」及「於身和合界,永盡無餘證」;此处「有餘」是所舍对象,「無餘」则分别与「寂滅」「證」结合,并非对「有餘涅槃」另作定义。

同经另一偈以烧热铁丸火焰渐息、莫知所归为譬,称解脱者已度烦恼淤泥、诸流永断,「莫知其所之」,终于「逮得不動跡,入無餘涅槃」。其特色语汇是「不動跡」以及「莫知其所歸/所之」;这些具体描述明确属于无餘一侧。

释经论部《大智度論》则使用「五眾」,不作「五陰」或「五蘊」;并以「捨五眾因緣——諸煩惱」与「捨五眾果」分别说明有餘、无餘。现有材料未提供同经异译本,故无法列举异译用词分歧。

四、与相关概念的关系

有餘涅槃与無餘涅槃构成最直接的对应关系。《大智度論》依所舍对象加以区分:前者舍五众之因即烦恼,后者舍五众之果;二者不是烦恼断与未断之别,而是烦恼已舍之后,五众果是否亦已舍离之别。

它亦与「解脫」相关:论中以正智断一切烦恼及习而得解脱,又明确以证时烦恼灭说明得有餘涅槃;但两段的具体术语不可未经原文说明便逐项等同。「畢定福田」则从供养与植福方面称说得有餘涅槃者,同时受到「诸法同无餘涅槃性」之说的限定。

五、代表性原文引用

《雜阿含經》:「我和上為有餘涅槃?無餘涅槃?」

《雜阿含經》:「捨一切有餘,得無餘寂滅」;「於身和合界,永盡無餘證。」

《雜阿含經》:「逮得不動跡,入無餘涅槃。」

《大智度論》以「捨五眾因緣——諸煩惱」说明有餘涅槃,以「捨五眾果」说明无餘涅槃。

《大智度論》:「證時」诸烦恼灭,故「得有餘涅槃」;又说得此者为「畢定福田」,并补称:「諸法同無餘涅槃性,故說無畢定福田。」

By SutraAI-generated

雜阿含經T0099 · 阿含部

《雜阿含經》論「有餘涅槃」,並非孤立地加以定義,而是將之置於「有餘」與「無餘」的對舉脈絡中呈現,使二者互為表裡,共同構成對涅槃境地的一體兩面之描述。

就核心表述而言,經中以偈頌總攝其義:「曉了於欲界,色界亦復然,捨一切有餘,得無餘寂滅。於身和合界,永盡無餘證。」 此偈顯示,行者先須「曉了」欲界、色界,進而「捨一切有餘」,方能「得無餘寂滅」;其歸趣落在「於身和合界,永盡無餘證」,也就是對那由諸法和合而成的身界,達至永盡無餘的親證。在此,「有餘」是所捨、所離的對象,「無餘寂滅」則是所證、所得的果地,兩者在同一修行進程中前後相承。經文以「捨」字標示由有餘過渡至無餘的動向,又以「寂滅」與「無餘」連用,作為涅槃的異名,構成「有餘—無餘—寂滅」一組彼此扣合的術語鏈。

就獨特側面而言,本經另以敘事呈現此概念的實踐意義。經載尊者尼拘律想於曠野禽獸之處疾病委篤,由尊者婆耆舍瞻視供養,其後「以疾病故,遂般涅槃」;婆耆舍隨即起念:「我和上為有餘涅槃?無餘涅槃?我今當求其相。」 此一問難,顯示在《雜阿含經》的語境中,「有餘涅槃」與「無餘涅槃」是用以判定一位已般涅槃之聖者究竟所至境地的根本分際;弟子於師長命終之後,所關切者正是其落於有餘抑或無餘。值得注意的是,本經此處並未徑行界定何謂有餘涅槃,而是透過「求其相」的提問,將判別之事付諸佛陀,呈現出一種「問題式」而非「定義式」的論述面貌。

就術語形式而言,《雜阿含經》一律以「有餘」「無餘」對舉,並與「涅槃」「寂滅」搭配使用,如「有餘涅槃」「無餘涅槃」「無餘寂滅」等詞組。又經中以「身和合界」指稱那由諸蘊和合而成的身,作為「永盡無餘證」的所緣對象,此與他經逕稱「五陰」「五蘊」的用詞有所不同,屬本經值得記錄的譯語。此外,偈末稱「三耶三佛說,無憂離垢句」,以「三耶三佛」稱佛,亦為本經用語之一端。綜上,本經論有餘涅槃,重在以有餘、無餘之對舉顯其分際,以「捨有餘、證無餘寂滅」明其歸趣,並以聖者般涅槃後「為有餘、為無餘」之問,示其為判定果位之關鍵概念。

大智度論T1509 · 釋經論部

《大智度論》以「有餘涅槃」與「無餘涅槃」對舉,從「捨」的兩重層次界定二者。論中先立五眾(即他經所稱五蘊,本論一律用「五眾」)為能生苦惱之「重擔」,而後明二種捨:「一者、有餘涅槃中,捨五眾因緣——諸煩惱;二者、入無餘涅槃中,捨五眾果。」 據此,有餘涅槃的核心義涵是:煩惱(五眾生起之因緣)已斷已捨,然五眾之果報身猶在;無餘涅槃則連五眾果報亦捨。論中緊接以「滅斷下五分結」「斷上分五結」及「諸法實相,金剛三昧相應智慧,斷一切煩惱及習」釋「正智、得解脫」,將有餘涅槃所斷定位於煩惱層面,而習氣之究竟斷盡則與金剛三昧相應。

在福田義的脈絡中,論云:「證時,諸煩惱滅,得有餘涅槃;得有餘涅槃故是畢定福田。」 此處以「證時」標記有餘涅槃的獲得時點——即現證之際煩惱滅盡,由此成為「畢定福田」(決定之福田)。然而論中隨即以般若空義翻轉:「畢定者,諸法同無餘涅槃性,故說無畢定福田。」 意謂若就諸法實相而言,一切法同於無餘涅槃之性,則所謂畢定福田亦不可得。有餘涅槃作為畢定福田的成立,是就世俗證果而說;就第一義則無定法可名福田。

此外,chunk:26836 所在的迴向段論及「一切法從和合生,無有自性,故無有定法名為佛」,並強調迴向心亦不生心想、心盡即知盡,「盡心不得迴向」,以「變失滅壞」「無常門」「法性中無有分別」諸語破除對能證、所證之執取。 此般若方便力的論述框架,為理解有餘涅槃「煩惱已盡而餘依猶存」提供了空性背景:有餘涅槃雖就斷惑說為實證,然能證之心與所證之果皆入法性,無有定相可得。

術語方面須注意:本論稱「五眾」而非「五蘊」,稱「白衣舍」指在家居士住所,稱「畢定」而非「決定」,皆為鳩摩羅什譯本之慣用詞形。

瑜伽師地論T1579 · 瑜伽部

《瑜伽師地論》以「有餘依涅槃界」與「有餘依般涅槃界」為本論標準術語,與「無餘依涅槃界」對舉,並於十七地中特立「有餘依地」「無餘依地」以攝此二。論中又以「有餘依故」說明煩惱已盡而現法苦樂猶復現行之狀態。

就定位言,本論於出世道作意修中立五離繫品界——斷界、無欲界、滅界、有餘依涅槃界、無餘依涅槃界;「即此唯有餘依故,名有餘依涅槃界」,謂修道所斷諸行斷後,唯餘所依身在。於修行證得脈絡中,「即此解脫圓滿,名有餘依涅槃界」,為聞思修九法次第修習之所圓滿,復以無餘依涅槃界為其上首。阿羅漢諸漏已盡、所作已辦,領受貪瞋癡無餘永盡,「住有餘依般涅槃界,度生死海,已到彼岸」,亦名「任持最後有身」;待先業煩惱所引諸蘊自然滅、餘取無故,方於無餘依般涅槃界而般涅槃。

論中於此界中煩惱與苦之關係辨析甚密:一切煩惱當言離繫;於一切苦則「亦離繫、亦不離繫」——未來生苦及現在生心所有苦當言離繫,而現身中飢苦、渴苦、界不平苦、時節變苦及餘逼迫等苦當言不離繫,「此由現前行故,非諸煩惱所繫縛故」。諸受方面,有餘依涅槃界中果未成滿受一切已滅,唯現領受明觸生受,至無餘依般涅槃時此亦永滅。又依初纏斷說名寂靜、依第二斷說名清涼、依第三斷說名宴默。

與無餘依之差別,論以問答明之:住有餘依墮在眾數、猶有眾苦、所得轉依猶與六處相應;住無餘依則不墮眾數、永離眾苦、永不相應。迴向菩提聲聞「唯住有餘依涅槃界中可有此事」,以無餘依中遠離一切發起事業、一切功用皆悉止息故。於聖教功能,四種善說法相中「能趣寂靜」謂能令證得有餘依涅槃界,與「能般涅槃」之無餘依相配;止觀五相解脫之第四相,即解脫修道所斷諸行而住有餘依般涅槃界。又此界為如來超過煩惱、無常二種過患所住「一向樂」,「即有餘依般涅槃界」,並與無餘依同為如來依二處所說無界教之一,亦為「及彼依持解脫堅固」之第一學果。於緣起流轉清淨義,無明滅故諸行不流轉,「於現法中住有餘依般涅槃界,名為證得現法涅槃」;此時識緣名色有餘未滅而清淨鮮白,有識身恒領離繫諸受,壽量盡後方入無餘依「究竟寂靜常住妙跡」。

Related