大般涅槃經集解 14.26

14.26

案僧亮曰：涅槃一法具二也。二言俱在當也。佛法僧常者，常即涅槃。常名是一，而三事即涅槃。僧宗曰：如三歸之異者，當知涅槃似不一體，欲令如來釋會三歸所以體一而義異之旨也。佛以眾生畏生死故，為說三名，非所以別體也。有法名一義異者，此更開釋所以得有施三名之竟也。夫施設名義自有多塗，如佛法僧常，是名一而三義是異。佛以覺為義也。法名不覺者，法以軌為義，非覺義也。涅槃名解脫者，即是無累，彼自有釋義也。今解脫者，是翻彼義釋也。虛空名非善者，非善非惡也，此證名義俱異者矣。我昔告彼提者，引證三歸名義不應一也。就別體法僧，則體義俱異。今就佛上，則其體雖一，逐義為三，不可以體一故，使義不得三也；謂義有三，欲令體亦別也。說一為三者，隨方設化，說法不同。三歸亦爾也。

Sengliang states: Nirvāṇa is one phenomenon that possesses both. Both statements correspond to the reality. That Buddha, Dharma, and Saṃgha are eternal means that eternity is nirvāṇa. The name 'eternal' is one, yet the three items are nirvāṇa. Sengzong states: As for the differences among the three refuges, one should know that nirvāṇa seems not to be of one substance; this is meant to have the Tathāgata explain and reconcile how the three refuges are one in substance yet different in meaning. Because sentient beings fear birth-and-death, the Buddha explained the three names for them, but not in order to distinguish their substance. That there are phenomena with one name and different meanings further clarifies and explains why the three names could be established. Now, the establishment of names and meanings naturally has many paths: just as Buddha, Dharma, and Saṃgha being eternal is one name, yet the three meanings are different. 'Buddha' takes awakening as its meaning. That the Dharma is called non-awakening means that Dharma takes standard as its meaning, not the meaning of awakening. Nirvāṇa being named vimokṣa means being free from encumbrance; it naturally has its own explanatory meaning. Vimokṣa now is explained by overturning that meaning. Space being called non-wholesome means neither wholesome nor unwholesome; this proves that names and meanings are both different. When I formerly told Vyāsa, it was cited to prove that the names and meanings of the three refuges should not be identical. In terms of the Dharma and Saṃgha of distinct substances, both their substance and meaning are different. Now, regarding the Buddha, although his substance is one, following the meanings it becomes three; one cannot, because the substance is one, cause the meanings not to be three; nor by saying the meanings are three wish to cause the substance to be separate. Explaining one as three is establishing transformation according to the situation, with different expositions of the Dharma. The three refuges are also like this.