大般涅槃經集解 60.18

60.18

案僧亮曰：物有強令他滅，理不可然，引而破之。一念念如水，滅已續生，即上性滅也。如火焚薪，更不復續，畢竟滅也。應有餘燼者，色非慮解，不待方便任運應起，是有也。火緣橫奪，故有餘燼存，可言強滅；心待方便，未來未有，非強滅也。寶亮曰：上五門說法，明無所斷。今從性滅究竟滅下去，定於法相。煩惱亦起即謝，不假治道，故言性滅。究竟滅者，就得解作語。從起一念癡後，則於萬境上不識；若修道得解，於萬境上悉明，迷用永不起，名為究竟滅。夫道生之時，亦無煩惱可斷。若解無斷而斷，名為正義也。本無解時常癡，若一剎那明起，於境悉達，第二運去方受斷名；前一念無所形，故不得名也。若至第二念去，云向癡今解，本不斷今斷也。

Sengliang states: That things can forcefully make another thing cease is an untenable principle; it is adduced and refuted. Thought after thought is like water: having ceased, it continues to arise; this is the aforementioned cessation in its own nature. It is like fire burning firewood: it does not continue any further; this is ultimate cessation. Where it is said that 'there should still be remaining embers': form is not a conscious understanding, and without waiting upon provisional means it ought to arise naturally of itself; this is an existent. Because the condition of fire forcefully displaces it, remaining embers persist, so one could speak of a forceful cessation; the mind, however, awaits provisional means, and the future has not yet existed, so it is not a forceful cessation. Baoliang states: The preceding five gates expounded the Dharma to make clear that there is nothing to be severed. Now, proceeding downward from cessation in its own nature and ultimate cessation, the marks of dharmas are determined. Afflictions also cease as soon as they arise, without depending on the path of antidotes; hence it is called 'cessation in its own nature.' 'Ultimate cessation' is phrased in terms of attaining understanding. From the moment a single thought of delusion arises, one fails to recognize anything across myriad sensory realms. If one cultivates the path and attains understanding, one is completely illuminated regarding all myriad sensory realms, and the functioning of delusion never arises again; this is called ultimate cessation. Now, when the path arises, there are also no afflictions to be severed. If one understands that it is non-severance yet severance, this is called the correct meaning. Originally, when there was no understanding, one was constantly deluded. If in a single instant clarity arises and one is thoroughly cognizant of sensory objects, only with the second movement onward does one receive the designation of 'severance.' In the preceding single thought nothing was yet configured, so it could not obtain that name. When it reaches the second thought onward, one says, 'What was previously delusion is now understanding; what was originally unsevered is now severed.'