大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 8.5

8.5

疏「入楞伽」下，亦成無趣寂義。言入楞伽者，即後魏菩提留支所譯，文有十卷。世尊入楞伽王城，故云入也。同引三卷經文，皆說無實涅槃，明知定無趣寂。若爾，何以言得涅槃？望其當分，謂是無餘涅槃。以大乘望之，但是深入三昧，沈空多時假言涅槃，以引劣器耳。疏「法華論中意亦同此」，故同無實涅槃也。論釋七譬喻中第四為有定性人說化城喻。論云「四者實無，而有增上慢人。以有世間有漏三昧三摩跋提，實無涅槃而生涅槃想，如是顛倒取。對治此故，為說化城譬喻應知。」釋曰：既言無實涅槃，明知是假說耳，故與前同。又《法華》云「我雖先說汝等滅度，但盡生死而實不滅。」次引《勝鬘》，亦成上來涅槃不實耳。

From the Commentary's "Entering the Laṅkāvatāra..." downward, this also establishes the meaning of not entering into quiescence. As for "Entering the Laṅkāvatāra," this refers to the translation by Bodhiruci of the Later Wei, which comprises ten fascicles. The World-Honoured One entered the royal city of Laṅkā, hence it is called "Entering." It equally cites three fascicles of sūtra text, all of which state that there is no real nirvāṇa, from which it is clearly known that there is definitely no entering into quiescence. If so, why speak of attaining nirvāṇa? Viewed from their own perspective, they consider it to be nirvāṇa without remainder. Viewed from the Mahāyāna perspective, it is merely entering deeply into samādhi, remaining submerged in emptiness for a long time; it is nominally called nirvāṇa in order to attract inferior vessels. In the Commentary: "The intention in the Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa is also identical to this," so likewise there is no real nirvāṇa. When the treatise explains the seven parables, the fourth is the Parable of the Conjured City, expounded for those of determinate nature. The treatise states: "Fourth, it is genuinely non-existent, yet there are people of overweening pride. Because they have worldly mundane samādhi and samāpatti, they produce the notion of nirvāṇa where there is genuinely no nirvāṇa, grasping it mistakenly like this. To remedy this, the Parable of the Conjured City was spoken for them, as should be understood." Explanation: Since it speaks of no real nirvāṇa, one clearly knows it is an expedient designation, and thus accords with the preceding. Furthermore, the Lotus Sūtra says: "Although I previously taught that you had attained extinction, that was only the exhaustion of birth and death, while in reality there was no extinction." Next, it cites the Śrīmālādevī-sūtra, which also establishes that the nirvāṇa mentioned above is not real.