大般涅槃經集解 18.5

18.5

Sengliang notes: Not seeing true bliss is not called seeing suffering. Why is that? Although the mind seeks bliss, it does not recognise true bliss; taking the three realms to be bliss, it does not see suffering, and one cannot determine this by animals. Jingyi's notes record Sengzong as saying: Within each truth there are four distinctions: first, clarifying delusion; second, clarifying understanding; third, concluding the noble truth; fourth, concluding what is not the truth. To clarify the round illumination of the Middle Way, it first clarifies non-understanding, explaining the meaning by contrasting them. The first layer clarifies that the name of 'truth' lies in illumination, not in suffering. The second clarifies that although the name of 'truth' lies in illumination, it does not lie in biased attachment. Clarifying that suffering has its proper place: if it does not attain its proper place, not only is the principle lost, but one also sinks further into suffering. The wisdom with remainder of the former teaching could not avoid inversion; today's teaching exhausts the principle, which is why it is truly wholesome karma. Baoliang says: Within each truth there are four layers of attaining the name of 'truth'; essentially, because understanding requires an uncomprehended cognitive sphere, the truth is explained in terms of the cognitive sphere. The four in the truth of suffering are: first, from the beginning up to 'much distress', clarifying the loss; second, from 'if there is anyone who can know' up to 'is immediately born in heaven', clarifying the gain; third, from 'at the time of later liberation' up to 'only then does one realise and know', this confirms the gain; fourth, from 'because of not knowing in the beginning' up to 'only now does one attain true wisdom', this confirms the loss. Zhixiu says: Under each and every truth there are three meanings. The three meanings in the truth of suffering are: up to 'endures much distress', the first adduces their ignorance to reveal the essential characteristics of the truth of suffering. From 'if there is anyone who can know' up to 'only now does one attain true wisdom', the second discerns attaining the fruit from the principle. From 'if known in this way' up to 'is not the noble truth of suffering', the third concludes the heterodox and orthodox. Huilang relates Sengzong's words: There are six stages in discerning the truth of suffering. This first directly levels the principle, stating that suffering that is not correct is not the noble truth of suffering.