大般涅槃經集解 17.3

17.3

案僧亮曰：答云何知天魔為眾作留難也，故是廣流通也。法瑤曰：夫邪黨嫉正、魔亂真道，能惑始學人，故宜辨其相。是以〈四依品〉中舉賊狗毒龍等譬，答問云何作留難也。今此一品并〈四諦品〉，答如來波旬說，云何分別知也。同是四十九年教，而善察者居然異也。智秀曰：問稱天魔者，蓋是舉天示極魔之勝耳。尋魔之為亂，事不止一，但以言之，為實亂為甚。故問云：如來波旬說，云何分別知也。此雖人法兩異，同能亂道，故合成一問也。慧誕曰：此品有四段，從品初至九部經，明魔佛二說相似而異也。二從九部以下，佛弟子執輕非重、執小非大，迭相誹謗，復是魔也。三從無四波羅夷以下，明大邪見人所說無善惡理，復是魔也。四從要因持戒以下，通明古今所可乖佛法事，盡是魔說也。今佛之與魔、在家出家、邪見正見、經律通塞，盡釋也。

Sengliang comments: This answers how to know that heavenly māras create obstacles for the assembly; therefore, this widely circulates [the teaching]. Fayao says: The faction of heterodoxy envies the upright, and māras disrupt the true path, capable of deluding beginners; therefore, it is fitting to distinguish their characteristics. Hence, in the chapter "The Four Reliances", using similes such as the thief, the dog, and the poisonous dragon, the question of how obstacles are created was answered. Now this one chapter, together with the chapter "The Four Truths", answers how to distinguish between what the Tathāgata and Pāpīyān say. Though both are teachings of the forty-nine years, to one who investigates well, they are clearly different. Zhixiu says: In addressing the question to 'heavenly māras', it simply refers to the heavens to show the supreme power of māras. Upon examining the disruption caused by māras, there is not merely one matter; but speaking of it, disruption by words is the most severe. Therefore the question asks: 'How are the statements of the Tathāgata and of Pāpīyān to be distinguished and known?' Although the persons and teachings are both different, they are equally capable of disrupting the path, so they are combined into a single question. Huidan says: This chapter has four sections. From the beginning of the chapter to the nine divisions of scriptures, it clarifies that the two teachings of māras and the Buddha are similar yet different. Second, from the nine divisions downward, the disciples of the Buddha seize upon the minor and negate the major, or seize upon the small and negate the great, mutually defaming one another, which is again māra. Third, from 'there are no four pārājikas' downward, it clarifies that what is expounded by people of great wrong view—that there is no principle of good and evil—is again māra. Fourth, from 'it is essential to uphold the precepts' downward, it comprehensively clarifies that whatever contradicts the Buddhadharma in past or present is entirely the talk of māras. Now, the Buddha and māras, householders and renunciants, wrong views and right views, the open and the obstructed in sutra and vinaya, are all explained.