大般涅槃經集解 38.54

38.54

案僧亮曰：生滅是有為，無生滅是無為也。今說有中無，無有之義同內外也。僧宗曰：亦互無也。有為是緣成之法，所可言無，無於空也。言內外空等者，舉此諸法空，明有為法是假有，無此諸法也。寶亮曰：有為之法亦不是，三寶等是無為法。若觀有為法空，不見與無為相異者，乃知得有為觀成也，舉無為法以證成耳。無為空者，有一人發初便觀三無為觀，觀有餘涅槃作數緣無為，觀無餘涅槃作非數緣滅無為。如此觀，不見有為異於無為，有為亦空，乃是無為觀成，故舉有為以證成也。亦簡三寶等法不同有為無為，若使神明無此妙本，何故至無為空時復簡正因性耶？

Sengliang comments: Arising and ceasing are conditioned; non-arising and non-ceasing are unconditioned. Now, explaining non-existence within existence, the meaning of lacking existence is the same as internal and external. Sengzong says: It is also mutual non-existence. Conditioned dharmas are produced by conditions; what can be said to be non-existent is non-existent with respect to emptiness. Speaking of internal and external emptiness and so forth: citing the emptiness of these dharmas clarifies that conditioned dharmas are provisionally existent and lack these dharmas. Baoliang says: Conditioned dharmas are also not [unconditioned]; the Three Jewels and the like are unconditioned dharmas. If, contemplating conditioned dharmas as empty, one does not see them as distinct from the unconditioned, then one knows that the conditioned contemplation is perfected; it merely cites unconditioned dharmas to verify and perfect it. As for unconditioned emptiness: there is a person who, from the very beginning, performs the contemplation of the three unconditioned states, contemplating nirvāṇa with remainder as analytical cessation (pratisaṃkhyānirodha), and nirvāṇa without remainder as non-analytical cessation (apratisaṃkhyānirodha). Contemplating in this way, not seeing the conditioned as distinct from the unconditioned, the conditioned is also empty; this is the perfection of the unconditioned contemplation, so the conditioned is cited to verify and perfect it. It also distinguishes and excludes dharmas such as the Three Jewels as not being the same as the conditioned and unconditioned; if the conscious spirit lacked this wondrous foundation, why would the nature of the direct cause be distinguished and excluded again upon reaching unconditioned emptiness?