大般涅槃經集解 4.53

4.53

案僧亮曰：所以牽學地者，明無常有麁細也。資揣食觸食及分段生死，是麁無常；念念生滅，是細無常。若後身菩薩，豈假於揣食以頓階妙常哉。要是金剛，不假食故，妙常即階耳。所以二施等者，用勝故也。若就權道斷有為因果者，而難斷故，金剛為習也；果難斷故，無學能除也。是以二施報，等無差別也。若假食以斷之，內用為勝也。實道雖復不假於食，而起施者，難得想也，故外用勝也。敬遺所記僧宗曰：此旨有二，一發昔教、二遣人封執物情。謂昔實是菩薩，今寄福等，則常旨自顯也。智秀曰：略舉始末二施並值常田、必獲常果，汝是二中之一也。慧朗述僧宗曰：此第三階，舉智慧門釋所以等也。寶亮曰：辨福田者，要以罪福相對乃顯也。何者？謂一念之善，上至金剛善善相續，皆福田位也。無明住地，下至四住地，一念之惑能感生死果報，皆罪田也。大判如此，曲撿其旨，不出三對六句也。初一對者，於福中作福，得福來資。前田清淨，殷重心施，與田無隔，故來資也。次辨罪田中，作罪得惡來資。如人布施，令前人造惡，則彼此相關，故罪來資也。第二對論福田中，作福不得福來資。謂作意於此人、無心於彼人，及其所送事與心乖。先無意於彼，彼無福來資；雖有心於此，而此無其事，復無福來資也。罪田中作罪而惡不來資者，如人害一闡提，以逆田故，罪不資也。第三對於福田中作惡，而田中無惡來資。但生惡由心，罪則背福，無相資之力也。又罪田中作福，如人供養闡提，乃由心邊自生福耳。然則辨心各有所以，糜家女人雖作樹神意施，其心無隔，冥相關感也。明駿案：夫福田之大，唯此二時：一謂成佛、二謂涅槃。值此時施，必剋常果也。此旨有二：一明今昔雖殊，同獲常果，以生純陀後難也。二明若施值此時必獲常果者，我亦曾值，豈得非常耶？

Sengliang comments: The reason for adducing the stage of training is to show that impermanence has both coarse and subtle aspects. Dependence on morsel-food, contact-food, and fragmented saṃsāra are coarse impermanence; moment-by-moment arising and ceasing is subtle impermanence. How could a bodhisattva in his final lifetime rely on morsel-food to suddenly ascend to wondrous permanence? He must surely be a diamond-like [bodhisattva who] does not depend on food, so wondrous permanence is immediately reached. The reason the two gifts are equal is because their functions are superior. If, according to the provisional path, conditioned causes and effects are severed, since they are difficult to sever, the diamond-like [stage] serves as the practice; and because effects are difficult to sever, the aśaikṣa can eliminate them. Therefore, the retributions of the two offerings are equal and without difference. If one depends on food to sever them, the inner function is superior. Although the true path does not rely on food, it gives rise to the conception in donors that it is rare to encounter, so the outer function is superior. Sengzong, as recorded by Jingyi, says: There are two main points here: first, to reveal the past teachings; second, to dispel people's clingings and ordinary sentiments. If the past was truly a bodhisattva, yet now the merit is provisionally said to be equal, then the meaning of permanence is naturally revealed. Zhixiu says: Briefly adducing the two offerings, initial and final, both encounter a permanent field and will certainly obtain a permanent fruit; you are one of the two. Sengzong, as related by Huilang, says: This is the third stage, presenting the door of wisdom to explain why they are equal. Baoliang says: When distinguishing fields of merit, it must be revealed by contrasting transgression and merit. What does this mean? From a single thought of good, ascending to the diamond-like [stage], the unbroken succession of good after good is the rank of the field of merit. From the avidyāvāsabhūmi down to the four stages of dwelling, a single thought of delusion that can induce the karmic fruit of birth and death is entirely a field of transgression. This is the general division; when examining the principle in detail, it does not exceed three pairs and six propositions. The first pair: making merit within merit, where merit comes to assist. The preceding field is pure, the donation is made with deep sincerity, and there is no separation from the field; hence it comes to assist. Next, in distinguishing within a field of transgression, committing a transgression brings evil to assist. For example, if a person gives a gift that leads the recipient to commit evil, then the two are mutually linked; thus transgression comes to assist. In the second pair, discussing within a field of merit, doing merit does not bring merit to assist. This means one's intention was directed toward this person, but one had no mind toward that person, and when what is given contradicts the mind. Having previously had no intention toward that [person], that person has no merit to come and assist; and although one had the intention toward this one, this one lacks the fact, so again no merit comes to assist. As for committing a transgression in a field of transgression where evil does not come to assist: as when a person kills an icchantika, because it is an adverse field, transgression does not assist. In the third pair, committing evil in a field of merit, the field has no evil to come and assist. Evil arises only from the mind; transgression goes against merit and has no power of mutual assistance. Also, making merit in a field of transgression: as when a person makes an offering to an icchantika, merit arises solely from the mind itself. Thus, when discerning the mind, each has its reason. Although the milk-gruel woman offered it with the intention of making an offering to a tree spirit, her mind had no obstacle, and there was a dark, mutual resonance. Mingjun comments: The greatness of the field of merit is found only at these two times: first, attaining buddhahood; second, entering nirvāṇa. An offering that encounters these times will certainly secure a permanent fruit. This principle has two meanings: first, to clarify that although present and past are distinct, both equally obtain a permanent fruit, in order to give rise to Cunda's subsequent objection; second, to clarify that if an offering meeting this time will certainly obtain a permanent fruit, I also once encountered it, so how could it not be permanent?