大般涅槃經集解 5.60

5.60

Sengliang comments: If one has not yet seen the principle of permanence, merely remaining silent will prevent external evils from growing; what use is it to distinguish between conditioned and unconditioned? Below this, protecting the Dharma is set forth. Baoliang says: If one claims that the Tathāgata is definitely conditioned by arising and ceasing, one might as well say he is unconditioned by total annihilation. He also says: One should not say that the Buddha is entirely and constantly identical to the conditioned, yet the Buddha is definitely unconditioned. Tan'ai says: Taking the text straightforwardly, it means one must not say the Tathāgata is definitely conditioned; one should say he is definitely unconditioned. Sengzong says: If one merely realizes permanence while confused about traces, that is not the way to have understanding. If one can explain the root without violating the traces, and understand the traces without going against the root, then one accords with the Middle Way. Therefore it says that one should not definitely declare him identical to conditioned phenomena, nor may one say he is entirely different. If he were entirely different, it would damage the traces. If one has not yet reached this today, one should simply blame oneself.