大般涅槃經集解 12.16

12.16

案僧亮曰：此答第一第三第四有餘句也。釋有餘煩惱起作不靜，滅之為靜，有餘滅因也。法瑤曰：答第一第三有餘旨也。此兩句，結盡無為寂靜尚得常住，何況法身不常住耶？僧宗曰：答有餘三復次也。言不名物者，謂非有為中物也。于時䨱相說，故言煩惱盡，意在非生死中物；而汝謬取佛意，謂為都盡。然法身常存，豈有滅耶？此中「何以故」，釋向云不名為物也。言永畢竟者，無惑而不盡，所以治道之功息也。是句寂靜者，向已釋有而是常，今還舉上滅煩惱之句即是真寂靜也。明駿案：此下第三釋會昔旨也。

Sengliang states: "This answers the first, third, and fourth clauses concerning with-remainder. It explains that in with-remainder, afflictions arise and function without quiescence; extinguishing them is quiescence. With-remainder is the cause of extinction." Fayao states: "This answers the purport of with-remainder in the first and third clauses. In these two clauses, if the unconditioned quiescence of the exhaustion of fetters is still able to be permanent, how much more so the dharmakāya?" Sengzong states: "This answers the three repetitions concerning with-remainder. Saying 'is not called a thing' means it is not a thing among conditioned phenomena. At that time it was spoken in a concealed manner, and so it was said that afflictions are exhausted, with the intention being that it is not a thing within saṃsāra; but you erroneously took the Buddha's intention, thinking it meant total extinction. Yet the dharmakāya constantly exists; how could it be extinguished? Here, 'Why is this?' explains what was just said about not being called a thing. Saying 'eternally ultimate' means there is no delusion that is not exhausted, which is why the work of the path of remedy ceases. 'This phrase is quiescent' means that having just explained that it exists and is permanent, he now brings up again that the preceding phrase about extinguishing afflictions is precisely true quiescence." Mingjun notes: "Below is the third: explaining and harmonizing the former purport."