25.10
Mūlamadhyamakakārikā / 25. Nirvāṇa (निर्वाण) / 25.10
प्रहाणं चाब्रवीच् छास्ता भवस्य विभवस्य च तस्मान् न भावो नाभावो निर्वाणमिति युज्यते
prahāṇaṃ cābravīc chāstā bhavasya vibhavasya ca tasmān na bhāvo nābhāvo nirvāṇam iti yujyate
The line
And the teacher said there is abandoning of coming-to-be and of passing-away. Therefore it fits that nirvāṇa (निर्वाण) is not an existent and not a nonexistent.
नेपालीमा
र गुरुले भन्नुभयो, हुनु र नाश हुनु दुवै त्यागिन्छ। यसैले निर्वाण भएको चीज होइन र नभएको चीज पनि होइन भन्ने मिल्छ।
Where it sits
25.9 described the to-and-fro taught without clinging. 25.10 anchors that in what the teacher said. 25.11 starts the next escape: what if it is both bhāva (भाव) and abhāva (अभाव)?
Split: prahāṇam (प्रहाणम्) + ca (च) + abravīt (अब्रवीत्) + śāstā (शास्ता) + bhavasya (भवस्य) + vibhavasya (विभवस्य) + ca (च) + tasmāt (तस्मात्) + na (न) + bhāvaḥ (भावः) + na (न) + abhāvaḥ (अभावः) + nirvāṇam (निर्वाणम्) + iti (इति) + yujyate (युज्यते)
Sanskrit, in depth
The words
| Word | Grammar | Sense |
|---|---|---|
| prahāṇam (प्रहाणम्) | accusative singular, neuter | the abandoning. |
| ca (च) | indeclinable | and. |
| abravīt (अब्रवीत्) | a past tense, third person singular | he said. Written abravīc (अब्रवीच्) before ś (श्). |
| śāstā (शास्ता) | nominative singular, masculine | the teacher. |
| bhavasya (भवस्य) | genitive singular, masculine | of bhava (भव), coming to be, existence as the round. |
| vibhavasya (विभवस्य) | genitive singular, masculine | of vibhava (विभव), passing out of being, annihilation. |
| ca (च) | indeclinable | and. |
| tasmāt (तस्मात्) | indeclinable | therefore. |
| na (न) | indeclinable | not. |
| bhāvaḥ (भावः) | nominative singular, masculine | an existent. |
| na (न) | indeclinable | not. |
| abhāvaḥ (अभावः) | nominative singular, masculine | a nonexistent. |
| nirvāṇam (निर्वाणम्) | nominative singular, neuter | nirvāṇa (निर्वाण). |
| iti (इति) | indeclinable | thus, as this statement. |
| yujyate (युज्यते) | present passive, third person singular | it fits. |
The phrases
The śāstā (शास्ता) spoke prahāṇa (प्रहाण) of both bhava (भव) and vibhava (विभव). Not of one of them. Therefore the statement 'nirvāṇa (निर्वाण) is neither bhāva (भाव) nor abhāva (अभाव)' is the one that fits.
tasmāt (तस्मात्) draws the statement out of the teacher's sentence, not out of a new theory.
Sanskrit in this line
bhava (भव) and vibhava (विभव) are the pair. prahāṇam (प्रहाणम्) takes both genitives. Dropping only one of them is not what was said.
Say it back
What two things did the teacher say are abandoned?