大般涅槃經集解 9.22

9.22

案僧宗曰：此舉事為難，謂不等也。物情見昔往往治罪，如似傷慈，故須明也。明駿案：此下第二迦葉難也。難意有兩。承上旨云：行慈持戒為因，得長壽為果。今此第一先難令無慈，而犯殺戒，使因義不立也；後第二舉現見涅槃，無長壽果也。若有長因，果不容短；果必不長，故知無因。反䨱兩關以成其義也。就前關中有三翻：第一定子想之慈也；第二舉事，以金剛神為成難也；第三舉理，以塗割為類也。此即第一定慈也。三種惡人亦作子想不耶？有兩階：先迦葉定、後佛答也。

Sengzong comments: This raises actual events as an objection, asserting that [the treatment] is unequal. Sentiments among people see that in the past wrongdoers were repeatedly punished, which seems to harm benevolence; hence it must be clarified. Mingjun comments: From here below is Kāśyapa’s second objection. The objection has two aspects. Following the previous purport, it was said that practicing benevolence and upholding the precepts are the cause, and obtaining a long lifespan is the fruit. Now, this first [aspect] raises an objection, implying there is no benevolence and that the precept against killing is violated, causing the principle of the cause not to stand; later, the second [aspect] adduces the presently visible nirvāṇa to show there is no fruit of long life. If there is a cause of longevity, the fruit cannot be short; if the fruit is definitely not long, therefore we know there is no cause. He turns both gates back and forth to establish his meaning. Within the former gate there are three turns: first, settling the benevolence of the thought of an only son; second, adducing an event, using the vajra-deity to form the objection; third, adducing the principle, using the analogy of anointing and lacerating. This is the first, settling benevolence: does he also conceive the thought of an only son toward the three kinds of evil people, or not? It has two steps: first Kāśyapa establishes it, and then the Buddha answers.