大般涅槃經集解 20.6

20.6

案僧亮曰：已知歸處，正應修習以趣之也。此下廣辨得失，以顯中道之行也。僧宗曰：此下大段第四也。前開善業，辯昔教不說含識有性，則是有倒善業不成；今依圓教皆有真性，此是正解即善業也。理深難解，亟生誹謗，勸生信解，要須善識來果之相也。雖復標心懸契，非行不階，是故應修中道觀行也。此下辯中道，有十別：第一有兩句，先定因果，即是略顯十道體相也；第二明乖理為倒；第三明如理為解；第四明如來知其偏發，能善療治；第五更復舉理驗其所執；第六尋其起惑之根原也，乃於如來所說偏教廣生謬執；第七明非但直於偏教之中生無常倒，亦迷昔日因果之言，生二法想也；第八引《般若經．燈炷品》相續中道；第九寄乳酪譬，重顯中道之理；第十歎教，言此經深隱，始是窮理也。寶亮曰：此下大段中第三也。辯三種中道，正明作善業義也。第一明離斷常有無中道；第二明實相中道；第三辯相續中道也。就明離有無中道，有五章：第一明失、第二明得、第三總為得失作譬、第四與佛作譬、第五勸行也。明失之中，初先開二句，且泛明天下失者之意；第二從「若言諸法皆無有我」以下，雙舉六行，正明失也。初二句者，若計身有神我，即是常見，明如此之人終不離於苦也。或復有言：佛亦同有神我之我。此第一句也。無我者，若謂此身乃至濫佛盡是斷滅者，既俱是空法，雖行淨行，何所獲耶？智秀曰：辨不斷不常中道。有五意：第一從始訖「無所利益」，正明常住定中道之理也，雖有而不在因中，然果非永無也。第二訖「要因斷常」，明違上所說則成二見，以為失也。第三訖「遠離二邊而說真法」，辨安心在理，修得中也。第四訖「清淨佛性常住不變」，釋上第二第三兩章，明所以有惑解之意也。第五訖「雖有去來，常住無變」，誡勸學者也。

Sengliang comments: Having already known the place of refuge, one should properly cultivate and advance toward it. Below, this extensively distinguishes gains and losses to reveal the practice of the Middle Way. Sengzong comments: Below is the fourth major section. Previously, wholesome karma was opened, discerning that in the former teaching it was not taught that sentient beings possess the nature, which was an inversion whereby wholesome karma could not be achieved; now, relying on the complete teaching, all have the true nature, and this correct understanding is precisely wholesome karma. The principle is profound and difficult to understand, frequently provoking slander; to encourage generating faith and understanding, one must properly recognise the signs of the future fruit. Although one may set one's intention and aspire from afar, without practice one cannot attain it; therefore, one should cultivate the contemplative practice of the Middle Way. Below, discerning the Middle Way has ten distinctions: First, two clauses initially determine cause and fruit, which briefly reveals the essence and characteristics of the Middle Way; second, explaining that contravening the principle constitutes an inversion; third, explaining that conforming to the principle constitutes understanding; fourth, explaining that the Tathāgata, knowing their partial inclinations, can skillfully heal them; fifth, again citing the principle to test their attachments; sixth, tracing the root origin of the arising of delusion, which is generating widespread erroneous attachments toward the partial teachings taught by the Tathāgata; seventh, explaining that not only do they directly generate the inversion of impermanence in the midst of the partial teaching, but they are also confused by the former words on cause and fruit, generating the conception of two phenomena; eighth, citing the Middle Way of continuity from the 'Lamp Flame Chapter' of the Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra; ninth, using the simile of milk and curd to re-elucidate the principle of the Middle Way; tenth, praising the teaching, saying that this sūtra is profound and hidden, and only now exhausts the principle. Baoliang comments: Below is the third part in the major section. It discerns three kinds of Middle Way, properly clarifying the meaning of producing wholesome karma. First, clarifying the Middle Way of existence and non-existence that is free from annihilation and permanence; second, clarifying the Middle Way of the true nature of phenomena; third, discerning the Middle Way of continuity. In clarifying the Middle Way free from existence and non-existence, there are five chapters: first, clarifying loss; second, clarifying gain; third, generally providing a simile for gain and loss; fourth, providing a simile for the Buddha; fifth, encouraging practice. In clarifying loss, initially two clauses are opened, broadly clarifying the idea of those in the world who incur loss; second, from 'If one says that all phenomena have no self' onward, both six practices are cited to properly clarify loss. As for the first two clauses: if one conceives that the body has a spiritual self, this is the view of permanence, making clear that such a person will never be free from suffering. Or again, there are those who say: 'The Buddha also has a self like the spiritual self.' This is the first clause. As for 'no-self': if one claims that this body up to and erroneously including the Buddha is entirely annihilated, since both would be empty phenomena, even if one cultivates pure conduct, what would be attained? Zhixiu comments: Discerning the Middle Way of neither annihilation nor permanence. There are five points: First, from the beginning up to 'has no benefit', it properly clarifies the principle of the Middle Way of permanent abiding. Although it exists, it is not within the cause, yet the fruit is not utterly non-existent. Second, up to 'must rely on annihilation or permanence', it clarifies that contravening what was stated above results in the two views, which constitutes loss. Third, up to 'far removed from the two extremes, he teaches the true Dharma', it discerns resting the mind in the principle, cultivating and attaining the middle. Fourth, up to 'the pure buddhadhātu is permanently abiding and unchanging', it explains the two chapters above (the second and the third), clarifying the reason why there are delusion and understanding. Fifth, up to 'although there is going and coming, it is permanently abiding and unchanging', it admonishes and encourages practitioners.