大般涅槃經集解 24.4

24.4

Sengliang comments: Next, this answers how, if the three vehicles have no nature, it can be preached. Above, cause and effect were spoken of twice, and the substance of the scripture was already identical; he repeatedly urged practice but had not yet clarified the method of practice. Being about to speak of the five practices as the foundation of cultivation, he further uses ten questions to resolve doubts and encourage faith. Why is this so? The scripture's principles of cause and effect are profound and distant; Cunda previously knew that the assembly at the time still harbored doubts, and Mañjuśrī, knowing their doubts but being unable to resolve them, questioned further by means of events. The doubt was that dharmas attained through conditions are all devoid of intrinsic nature, and the realized fruits of the three vehicles are all attained through conditions. If the Buddha is eternal, the two vehicles should also be eternal; if the two vehicles are impermanent, the Buddha should also be impermanent, which is why it was said that there is no distinction. If the two vehicles were eternal, why, when actual bliss has not yet arisen, would it be called experiencing bliss? Sengzong says: From here up to "the most supreme unsurpassed path," all of it is an extensive eulogy. The benefit of the scripture does not go beyond cause and effect. Among the previous seven questions, four asked about the benefit of the cause and three asked about the benefit of the fruit; one cycle of clarifying the doctrine, the two benefits of cause and effect, was concluded in the preceding text. Below, Mañjuśrī reiterates Cunda's doubts to make an extensive eulogy, because those who attain understanding do so through this scripture. Baoliang says: What Cunda doubted and what Kāśyapa asked are identical in intent though different in wording.