大般涅槃經集解 1.14

1.14

案法智曰：夫言象生自數內、形名起於累中。至人神道，既無象無言，豈復有其形名者哉？圓道不可以遍稱，故以該德總名，強謂之涅槃。此天竺之音也，具存胡名應言般涅槃那。外國此名有多義，茲土無音以反之，故存胡而名焉。既寄名，為其名寄有言乎，而以言言理者，亦是寄言也。若可寄言，請試言之。源涅槃為理，超注數之表、絕冥朕之外。語其幽徹，斯在於本有者也。所言本有，乃是玄指未來隔世為有耳，不言現在同世有也。若以未來為有，則稟識之類，源本未造因時已自有之，故言本有也。若未造因時本自有之，則不待業緣為其始，故非始造矣。既非始造，故說此未來。不同三世，要待造業方得為有也。雖本自有之，然未來未起，已來用故，故須了因。然方應欲顯其果體圓滿具足，故為之置名，是則萬德之義無非涅槃義也。故始開伊字，便寄三德以明涅槃，表異昔說也。何者？昔教以身智是有為，未脫果縛，須滅身智始是無為，說此滅法為無為解脫也。若此滅法可得說為解脫、滅度、無為、樂淨諸義，故對生死即說之，為無餘涅槃也。是為昔說涅槃亦有多義，但不得說身智耳，所以三事俱無也。今既無餘極教，有異於昔，必須存三德，即身智而為解脫矣。存三德者，顯三德一體為涅槃法，法皆有德為涅槃義也。三德體為涅槃法者，經言「法名自體」，故以體為法也。三德為涅槃義者，以三德在法，則法有三義，故三德義皆為涅槃義也。言法身為涅槃義者，法以法則為用，身是體之異名。良以其體可法，故名為法身。今常住涅槃既有體可法，故以法身義為涅槃義也。般若義為涅槃義者，般若以鑒解為功，常住涅槃既言有體，則無知而無不知，即是般若，故以般若義為涅槃義也。解脫義為涅槃義者，解脫以脫縛為義，常住涅槃其體雖在，然因縛果縛二俱解脫，故以解脫義為涅槃義也。昔說涅槃既言身智二俱盡滅，所以二俱明之；其餘諸義二教通有，事同解脫，略而不辨也。唯我義功在覺者，涅槃是法寶，人法既殊，無俟有釋也。若凡是萬德義，皆為涅槃義，則法是圓法，名亦圓名。名法兩圓，始盡至人神道之極致，故名涅槃也。復以大大之者，顯其名理俱極也。昔二事盡滅，未是所以大；今明涅槃，其體圓滿，理既應名、名不失理，名理俱極，始是所以大也。經者，唯金口所吐言理乃得稱經，弟子製作、非佛印可，不得稱也。何者？經之字訓略有二義：一訓言常；其二言由。常者，夫至人智極而後言，言必稱理矣。眾聖莫能改言，故言常也。出凡入聖，靡不由之。佛之所說既窮茲二，故得稱為經也。弟子所說，理有所未鑒、言有所未真，既於常由二義有所未極，故不得稱為經。是以維摩、勝鬘雖有所說，要須佛印可，方得稱經。

Fazhi states: Words and images arise from within numbers; forms and names originate amidst entanglements. As the divine path of the Perfect Person is devoid of images and words, how could it have forms and names? Because the consummate Path cannot be called comprehensively, one relies on an overarching name that embraces all virtues and arbitrarily terms it nirvāṇa. This is an Indian word; if fully retained as the barbarian name, it should be called parinirvāṇa. In the foreign country, this name contains many meanings, and this land lacks a term with which to translate it directly; therefore, the barbarian name is preserved to designate it. Since a name is provisionally applied, does its name dwell in words? Using words to speak of the principle is likewise a provisional use of words. If words may be provisionally used, let us attempt to speak of it: Fundamentally, nirvāṇa as the principle transcends the realm of numbers and surpasses the bounds of imperceptible omens. Speaking of its profound clarity, this lies in its primordial existence. When we speak of 'primordial existence', it profoundly points to existence in future, distinct lifetimes; it does not mean existing in the same present lifetime. If it is taken as existing in the future, then all beings endowed with consciousness already fundamentally possessed it before creating causes; thus it is called 'primordially existent'. If they already fundamentally possessed it before creating causes, then it does not depend on karmic conditions for its inception; hence it is not newly created. Since it is not newly created, this future is spoken of: it is not like the three periods of time where one must wait to perform karma before it can exist. Although they fundamentally possess it, because it has not yet arisen in the future to function, it therefore requires elucidating causes. Then, wishing to reveal that its fruitional essence is consummate and complete, a name is established for it; thus, none of the meanings of the myriad virtues are not the meaning of nirvāṇa. Therefore, when first opening the letter 'I', one then relies on the three virtues to elucidate nirvāṇa, demonstrating the difference from past teachings. Why so? The past teachings took the body and wisdom as conditioned, not having escaped fruitional bondage; one had to extinguish body and wisdom before there was unconditionedness, speaking of this dharma of cessation as unconditioned vimokṣa. If this dharma of cessation could be spoken of in terms of the meanings of vimokṣa, extinction-deliverance, unconditionedness, bliss, and purity, then in contrast to saṃsāra it was spoken of as nirvāṇa without remainder. Thus, in past teachings, nirvāṇa also had many meanings, but body and wisdom could not be spoken of; hence, all three things were absent. Now, since this is the supreme teaching of non-remainder, differing from the past, it must preserve the three virtues, taking body and wisdom themselves to be vimokṣa. Preserving the three virtues reveals that the three virtues in a single essence constitute the dharma of nirvāṇa, and that the dharma having all virtues constitutes the meaning of nirvāṇa. As for the essence of the three virtues being the dharma of nirvāṇa, the sūtra states, '"Dharma" is named from self-essence'; hence essence is taken as dharma. As for the three virtues being the meaning of nirvāṇa, because the three virtues reside in the dharma, the dharma has three meanings; therefore, the meanings of the three virtues are all meanings of nirvāṇa. When saying the dharmakāya is the meaning of nirvāṇa: 'dharma' takes being a model as its function, and 'kāya' is another name for essence. Truly because its essence can be modeled, it is named dharmakāya. Now, since the permanent nirvāṇa possesses an essence that can be modeled, the meaning of dharmakāya is taken as the meaning of nirvāṇa. As for the meaning of prajñā being the meaning of nirvāṇa: prajñā takes reflective understanding as its efficacy. Since permanent nirvāṇa is said to possess an essence, it has no knowledge yet leaves nothing unknown, which is prajñā itself; therefore, the meaning of prajñā is taken as the meaning of nirvāṇa. As for the meaning of vimokṣa being the meaning of nirvāṇa: vimokṣa takes liberation from bondage as its meaning. Although the essence of permanent nirvāṇa persists, both causal bondage and fruitional bondage are liberated; therefore, the meaning of vimokṣa is taken as the meaning of nirvāṇa. Since the past explanation of nirvāṇa stated that both body and wisdom were entirely extinguished, both of these are clarified; as for the other meanings, they are common to both teachings, their matters being identical to vimokṣa, so they are omitted without distinction. Only the meaning of self has its efficacy in the Awakened One; nirvāṇa is the Dharma-jewel, and since person and dharma are distinct, there is no need for explanation. If all meanings of the myriad virtues are the meaning of nirvāṇa, then the dharma is a consummate dharma and the name is also a consummate name. When both name and dharma are consummate, they only then exhaust the ultimate reaches of the divine path of the Perfect Person; hence it is named nirvāṇa. Further, magnifying it with 'mahā' reveals that both its name and its principle are consummate. In the past, the complete extinction of the two matters was not yet what made it great; now, clarifying nirvāṇa, its essence is consummate: since the principle corresponds to the name and the name does not forfeit the principle, both name and principle being consummate is precisely what makes it great. As for 'sūtra': only what is uttered from the golden mouth expressing the principle may be called a sūtra; compositions of disciples not certified by the Buddha cannot be so called. Why so? The character 'jing' (sūtra) glosses roughly with two meanings: first, it glosses as 'constant'; second, it glosses as 'pathway'. As for 'constant': the Perfect Person's wisdom reaches the utmost and only then speaks; his words necessarily accord with the principle. None of the sages can alter his words; hence it is called 'constant'. In departing the ordinary and entering the noble, there is none who does not proceed through it. Since what the Buddha taught exhausts both of these, it can be called a sūtra. In what disciples speak, the principle is not fully illuminated and the words are not fully true; since they do not reach the utmost in the two meanings of constancy and pathway, their words cannot be called sūtras. Thus, although Vimalakīrti and Śrīmālā taught, they necessarily required the Buddha's certification before their teachings could be called sūtras.