大般涅槃經集解 45.21

45.21

案僧亮曰：意在前關也。聞不聞義，不離此二。若聞作不聞，則有法應滅；若不聞作聞，則無法可生也。此第一難也。僧宗曰：先說兩關，令法相是定也。若定有者，可從聲教而聞；若定無者，則妙絕於相，永不可聞也。無不應生者，若理絕聲教，不可聞聲而聞也。有不應滅者，謂聲教是可聞之法，不可令不聞也。寶亮曰：夫定有之法，則常可得聞；若必定無，則常不可聞。所以聞所不聞，此義不然。

Sengliang notes: The meaning lies in the preceding dilemma. The principle of hearing and not hearing does not depart from these two. If what is heard were made into what is not heard, then an existent phenomenon should perish; if what is not heard were made into what is heard, then a nonexistent phenomenon could arise. This is the first objection. Sengzong says: He first states the two alternatives so that the characteristics of phenomena are determined. If it is definitively existent, it can be heard through verbal teaching; if it is definitively nonexistent, then it is wondrously cut off from marks and is forever unhearable. 'What is nonexistent should not arise' means that if the principle is cut off from verbal teaching, it cannot be heard by hearing sounds. 'What is existent should not perish' means that verbal teaching is a phenomenon that can be heard and cannot be made unheard. Baoliang says: A definitively existent phenomenon can always be heard; if it is definitively nonexistent, it can never be heard. Therefore, to hear what was not heard—this principle is not so.