大般涅槃經集解 16.134

16.134

案僧亮曰：第八段會宗也。明人能知法，人即是法，不違昔說也。僧宗曰：二教似反，所以須會。昔說四依，謂依法不依人，乃至依智不依識，是則不使依人，有多過也。自有人是而法非、人非而法是，自有人法俱是、人法俱非者也。而淺識之徒不能分別，或謂人非遂失正法，或見人是乃受耶教，則有失法之過也。是故觀令依法也。雖復置人，以取法故，宜簡擇了不了也，了義者奉行，不了義者勿用也。雖知了義，應廢辭華以存義實。雖復遺文以入理，要宜虛懷以為勝，若不虛懷則成識著。當依智人之矜抱，勿依凡夫之識著也。此是昔日四依也。若利根人者，不假聞四，但聞一二已可知矣。若依人則多過也。今日所以說依人者，昔佛在世，經教未為、人根多利，自能依法以得於人。涅槃之後，經教穿鑿、文理難尋，正當憑信弘通以取真實也。昔言依法，必是正法，即是法所教人；今言依人，必是體法之人，即是依人所行法也。昔言法、今言人者，蓋互舉其一耳。下有三章：第一就經釋會、第二就律釋會、第三結四依名也。寶亮曰：人是總名，法是差品，故使依法以取人也。及捉法以取人，故是依法耳。今日四人與佛不異，故但使依人也。雖有四名，但為成初一依耳。何者？言依法不依人，而五陰是成人之法也。義是法下，所以若此語有義、與理相應者，此則可依；若但有語而無義，不可依也。如言陰有神我，但有語也；若言生滅無常，則有義也。了義經者，以三法印為了義，異此非了義也。依智不依識者，智性取法分明，緣中忘相，所以可依。識本取著，不會法相，不可依也。故知後三為成前一也。

Sengliang notes: The eighth section harmonizes the doctrines. It clarifies that a person can know the Dharma, and the person is identical to the Dharma, which does not contradict past teachings. Sengzong says: The two teachings seem contradictory, which is why they must be harmonized. In the past, the four reliances were taught, stating to rely on the Dharma and not on the person, up to relying on wisdom and not on consciousness; this meant not having people rely on persons because of many faults. There are cases where the person is correct but the doctrine is wrong, where the person is wrong but the doctrine is correct, where both person and doctrine are correct, and where both person and doctrine are wrong. Shallow-minded people cannot distinguish them: either they think the person is wrong and thereby lose the true Dharma, or seeing the person is correct, they accept false teachings, which incurs the fault of losing the Dharma. Therefore, they are directed to rely on the Dharma. Although setting aside the person to take up the Dharma, one should still distinguish between definitive and non-definitive meanings: practice definitive meanings and do not employ non-definitive meanings. Even knowing the definitive meaning, one should discard flowery expressions to preserve the reality of the meaning. Even though discarding the letter to enter the principle, it is essential to keep an open mind to be superior; if one does not keep an open mind, it becomes attachment to consciousness. One should rely on the broad-mindedness of the wise and not rely on the conscious attachments of ordinary people. These were the former four reliances. If one is of sharp faculties, one need not hear all four; merely hearing one or two, one already knows. Relying on persons incurs many faults. The reason relying on persons is taught today is that formerly, when the Buddha was in the world, the scriptural teachings were not yet distorted, and people's faculties were mostly sharp, so they could naturally rely on the Dharma to find the person. After the nirvāṇa, scriptural teachings are dissected and the textual principles are hard to trace; one must directly place trust in those who propagate them widely to obtain reality. Formerly, saying 'rely on the Dharma' meant it must be the true Dharma, which is the person taught by the Dharma; today, saying 'rely on the person' means it must be a person who embodies the Dharma, which is relying on the Dharma practiced by the person. Formerly speaking of Dharma and today speaking of person is merely mentioning one of the two interchangeably. Below there are three chapters: first, explaining the harmonization in terms of the sūtras; second, explaining the harmonization in terms of the Vinaya; third, concluding the names of the four reliances. Baoliang says: 'Person' is a general name, and 'Dharma' refers to differentiated grades; hence one is made to rely on the Dharma to select the person. Taking hold of the Dharma to select the person is still relying on the Dharma. Today's four persons are not different from the Buddha; hence one is simply made to rely on the person. Although there are four names, they merely serve to accomplish the first reliance. Why? It says to rely on the Dharma and not on the person, yet the five aggregates are the dharma that constitutes a person. Meaning is what underlies the Dharma; therefore, if these words have meaning and correspond with principle, they can be relied upon; if there are only words without meaning, they cannot be relied upon. For instance, saying that within the aggregates there is a spiritual self consists merely of words; if one says that arising and cessation are impermanent, then it has meaning. Definitive sūtras are those that take the three Dharma seals as definitive; anything other than this is non-definitive. Relying on wisdom and not on consciousness: the nature of wisdom grasps the Dharma distinctly and forgets marks amid conditions, which is why it can be relied upon. Consciousness fundamentally grasps and attaches, failing to accord with the marks of phenomena, so it cannot be relied upon. Thus we know the latter three serve to accomplish the former one.