大般涅槃經集解 51
English (machine translation) 51
- Language
- English
51.1
Extensively analyzing the proximate causes of nirvāṇa; drawing near to good friends; listening to the Dharma with undivided mind; relating the event of Śāriputra, when ill, being carried on a bed to the Buddha to listen to the Dharma; practicing in accordance with the Dharma; extensively analyzing the eight, seven, six, and other aspects of nirvāṇa and buddhadhātu; explaining the meaning of space; explaining the meaning of nirvāṇa as the place where defilements are severed; citing the past event of announcing to Māra that he would enter nirvāṇa in three months; explaining the name of nirvāṇa.
51.2
Chapter on the Noble King of Virtue, Part 7
51.3
"Furthermore, good son! How does a bodhisattva-mahāsattva [...] fourth, practicing in accordance with the Dharma?"
51.4
Sengliang comments: The seventh and eighth broadly expand upon the merits of the infant practice. These four kinds of virtues are what is practiced by beginners, the virtues of an infant. That they serve as proximate causes is because reversing perversion serves as a proximate cause. Sengzong says: From the seventh to the tenth, they all comprehensively expand upon the previous practices. Here the seventh also takes the three wisdoms as its essence. The first merit explains what arises from the power of the sūtra, while this one clarifies that the three wisdoms arise from good friends; this is the difference. Baoliang says: The seventh merit takes the four dharmas as its essence. These four dharmas are practices taught to infants, namely: drawing near to good friends, listening to the Dharma with undivided mind, binding mindfulness in reflection, and practicing in accordance with the Dharma. Therefore, the chapter opens by declaring: only these four dharmas are proximate causes of nirvāṇa. If one speaks of the ascetic practices of non-Buddhists and considers them to be correct, there is no such possibility. Now, in clarifying the four dharmas here, there are broadly three rounds: The first round has three similes, summarizing the four dharmas in terms of a single dharma, and they correspond naturally within the text. The second round, from 'Good friends are bodhisattvas, Buddhas, śrāvakas, and pratyekabuddhas' onward, briefly and separately clarifies the four dharmas. In this round, the two vehicles are taken as good friends; however, since in the previous round matters were not differentiated, it is considered general. A good friend can instruct people in the good path, aligning with what they practice themselves; when self and other are of equal intent, both can escape suffering—such are the characteristics of a good friend.
51.5
"Good son! Just as when a person encounters various illnesses in body [...] yet constantly teaches and transforms without fatigue or disgust."
51.6
Sengliang comments: These three similes generally serve as similes for the four dharmas being proximate to nirvāṇa. Sengzong says: Within this praise there are two rounds: first general praise, and later specific praise. The general praise has four layers. This is the first, presenting four similes to first reveal the virtues of a good friend.
51.7
"Good son! A good friend is what is called a bodhisattva [...] among śrāvakas, those who have faith in the vaipulya [teachings]."
51.8
Sengzong comments: The second specifies the persons. Outside of these persons, none are good friends; this summary is completely exhaustive.
51.9
"Why is one called a good friend? [...] For this reason, one is called a good friend."
51.10
Sengliang comments: This separately explains the meaning of the four dharmas. 'Abandoning the ten unwholesome actions' explains that a good friend always accords with good deeds. 'If I do not give rise to evil' refers to one who speaks and acts in accordance with the Dharma. Benefiting me has two aspects: speaking in accordance with the Dharma is verbal benefit; acting in accordance with the Dharma is non-verbal benefit. Because there are wholesome dharmas, the benefit spoken of becomes ever deeper. 'For the sake of sentient beings' means being good and not engaging in what is not good. Sengzong says: The third explains the meaning of a good friend, briefly presenting their virtues.
51.11
"Good son! Just as the moon in the sky, from the first day [...] because of drawing near to a good friend."
51.12
Sengliang comments: A simile is stated to illustrate it. 'Wholesome dharmas daily increase': in this, there are four divisions explaining the characteristics of wholesome dharmas, and this is the first. Sengzong says: The fourth encourages people to rely on a good friend. It explains the benefits of relying on them in five layers; this is the first, a general praise.
51.13
"Because of this drawing near, one further attains thorough comprehension [...] profound meanings is called listening to the Dharma."
51.14
Baoliang comments: This is the second benefit.
51.15
"Listening to the Dharma refers to the Mahāyāna vaipulya scriptures [...] through cultivating and gathering them, one attains Mahānirvāṇa."
51.16
Sengliang comments: The second explains listening to the Dharma with undivided mind. Sengzong says: The third—earlier it generally clarified the thorough comprehension of the twelve divisions of the canon; here it specifically clarifies the meaning. Baoliang says: This clarifies hearing the true Dharma.
51.17
"Good son! Just as a sick person, although hearing the physician's instructions [...] this is called the bodhisattva binding mindfulness in reflection."
51.18
Sengliang comments: The third is binding mindfulness in reflection. Sengzong says: The fourth praises samādhi.
51.19
"What is called practicing in accordance with the Dharma? [...] never ultimately enters nirvāṇa."
51.20
Sengliang comments: The fourth is practicing in accordance with the Dharma. Above, the causal dharmas were explained; here, the fruitional dharmas are explained. Sengzong says: The first three praises explain hearing-wisdom, the fourth single praise explains reflection-wisdom, and this fifth praise explains cultivation-wisdom.
51.21
"Good son! The foremost true good friend [...] then attains proximity to Mahāparinirvāṇa."
51.22
Sengliang comments: The third reiterates. First it explains the first of the four dharmas, the good friend.
51.23
"How does a bodhisattva, through the condition of listening to the Dharma [...] then attain proximity to Mahāparinirvāṇa?"
51.24
Sengliang comments: This expands upon the second, listening to the Dharma with undivided mind. Sengzong says: 'Various merits' refers precisely to what is clarified here, from drawing near to a good friend up to practicing as taught. 'Ten kinds of consolations' refers to the eightfold noble path together with the knowledge of exhaustion and the knowledge of non-arising. Baoliang says: Below, the four dharmas are broadly clarified; it clarifies that the distinction between a bodhisattva and a Buddha is almost exhausted, which is why it belongs to the foremost good friend. Proceeding to clarify the four dharmas in the text below, the chapter divisions are distinct and their facts and principles can be traced, so they cannot all be broadly explained. Speaking of the four merits of a srotāpanna brings up past events to prove that the power of listening to the Dharma is great, which is identical to the four dharmas clarified just now. As for the ten kinds of consolations: the eightfold noble path constitutes eight, and right view and mental liberation make ten. Right view is knowledge of non-arising, and mental liberation is knowledge of exhaustion. These are precisely the dharmas previously known to him. But due to the condition of painful illness, he was unable to focus on them again, so having them spoken again caused him to forget the pain and focus on the Dharma.
51.25
"How does a bodhisattva, through the condition of reflection [...] then attain proximity to Mahāparinirvāṇa?"
51.26
Sengliang comments: This expands upon the third, binding mindfulness in reflection.
51.27
"How does a bodhisattva practice in accordance with the Dharma? [...] seventh, self; eighth, purity: this is called nirvāṇa."
51.28
Daosheng comments: 'Exhaustion' means that afflictions and habitual tendencies are completely exhausted. 'Wholesome nature' means that the subtlety of principle constitutes wholesomeness, and returning to the origin constitutes nature. 'Real' means that its essence is permanent. 'True' means that it sees permanence. 'Permanent' means that without seeing permanence, there is no permanence. 'Bliss' means being permanent. 'Self' means being autonomous due to permanence. 'Purity' means that defilements are exhausted.
51.29
"Furthermore, there are eight qualities. What are the eight? […] Seventh, non-self; eighth, impermanence."
51.30
Daosheng comments: Ordinary beings' cutting off of afflictions is also called nirvāṇa, and therefore it is mentioned here. Because they are not yet completely exhausted, it is not called 'exhaustion.' Because there is release from fetters, it is also called 'liberation.' 'Wholesome nature' likewise means wondrous wholesomeness. 'Not real and not true' means not seeing permanence. 'Impermanence' up to 'impurity' means that afflictions arise again, and therefore [these qualities] are absent.
51.31
"Furthermore, there are six characteristics: first, liberation […] the Tathāgata, the Dharma, the Saṅgha, the true characteristic, and empty space."
51.32
Sengzong comments: This further explains 'practicing in accordance with the Dharma': by skillfully discerning the genuine and the counterfeit among dharmas, one can engage in practice. As for 'whether true or not true,' the text below extensively lists the genuine and the counterfeit. It means that without discerning the characteristics of the seven dharmas, though one cultivates, it is not genuine. If one skillfully discerns the seven dharmas, it is called genuine. Nirvāṇa refers to the mahānirvāṇa of the stage of fruition. Buddhadhātu encompasses both cause and fruition. The Tathāgata refers to the person of the stage of fruition. Dharma refers to what remains when distinguishing the Buddha and the Saṅgha; this is called Dharma. Saṅgha also encompasses both cause and fruition. The true characteristic summarizes all dharmas as none other than real. Empty space simply means great empty space. This means that not knowing these seven dharmas is called 'not real'; realizing the characteristics of the seven dharmas is called 'true and real.' As for the 'eight [qualities],' this first explains the eight qualities of the Buddha-fruition: First, 'exhaustion' means exhausting all delusions. When evil is overturned and fully exhausted, it is termed 'wholesome nature.' Because deceptive dharmas are exhausted, the true and real alone remains. Below, by contrasting with the four non-permanences, together with the preceding they make eight. As for 'Furthermore, there are eight qualities,' this clarifies the nirvāṇa of non-Buddhists. First, 'liberation' does not mean they fail to subdue afflictions; at that time they overturn evil into a wholesome nature. 'Not real and not true' means that after being subdued, [delusions] arise again; they have not yet illuminated the principle. The four non-permanences below mean that having not yet ascended to the ultimate fruition, these are saṃskṛta dharmas. As for 'Furthermore, there are six characteristics,' these belong to the two vehicles. First, 'liberation' means obtaining asaṃskṛta as induced by the uncontaminated according to their capacity. Overturning evil, it is wholesome. Third, 'not real,' and fourth, 'not true' mean that they still must sever remaining suffering and realize remaining cessation. Because there is a further superior and ultimate cessation that they themselves have not yet attained, it is not true and real. Fifth, 'peace and bliss' means that because they escape the heavy suffering of the three realms, they have a small degree of bliss. Holding the uncontaminated, this is a pure dharma. Its essence is flowing and changing, so it cannot attain permanence. Having not yet attained the eight autonomous selfhoods, it is non-self. Having [afflictions] and being released from them shows that this fruition is not yet ultimate. 'If relying on the worldly path' explains why the non-Buddhists are not genuine. 'What are the six characteristics?' explains the two vehicles. The reason it does not explain the eight of the Buddha-fruition again is that having already explained the two non-ultimate kinds, by comparing them it can be known. 'Not called knowing the buddhadhātu' means that its meaning and designations are different, hence it says 'not knowing.' Baoliang comments: From here below it explains practicing in accordance with the Dharma. If one can thoroughly understand the seven matters, this is genuine practice in accordance with the Dharma. The seven matters are fully as listed in the sūtra. First, knowing that nirvāṇa is of three kinds: first, knowing that the Buddha-fruition nirvāṇa has eight qualities; next, knowing that the non-Buddhists' nirvāṇa of subduing afflictions has eight qualities; third, knowing that the śrāvakas take the emptiness of annihilation as nirvāṇa, having six qualities. If one knows in this way that nirvāṇa has an ultimate, one can be called one who genuinely practices in accordance with the Dharma.
51.33
"How does a bodhisattva know the buddhadhātu? […] this is called a bodhisattva knowing the buddhadhātu."
51.34
Sengzong comments: As for the buddhadhātu having six, in explaining the nature, the first four seem to specifically know the fruition, and the fifth, 'will be seen,' seems to refer to the nature of contributory causes. The illumination of the middle way, not being a counterfeit dharma, is therefore true. 'First, realizable, the remaining six as above' means that the wisdom of fruition is additionally brought to bear, realizing and attaining this nature. Baoliang comments: This is what is attained on the ninth stage. First, 'permanent' is the goodness of contributory causes: once obtained it is not lost, and because it is contemplated as a permanent dharma, it is permanent. Second, because its essence can eliminate delusion, it is pure. Third, contrasted with falsity, it is called real. Fourth, being a pure ascent, it is called wholesome. Fifth, it is the nature of fruition that will be seen. Sixth, contrasted with the counterfeit, it is called true. 'Furthermore, there are seven' refers to the buddhadhātu of the tenth stage. Adding 'realizable' means seeing a small degree of the fruition nature. The remaining six are as explained above.
51.35
"How does a bodhisattva know the characteristics of the Tathāgata? […] this is called a bodhisattva knowing the characteristics of the Tathāgata."
51.36
Daosheng comments: 'Tathāgata' is the designation of a person. 'Awakened' means awakening from the sleep of the afflictive entanglements. 'Wholesome characteristic' means that in nirvāṇa delusions are extinguished, the original nature is attained and conforms to nature; the Tathāgata is purely wholesome. 'Permanence, bliss, self, and purity' means that while seemingly not coming, he in reality constantly comes, which is his characteristic. 'Liberated' means that the person seems not yet liberated, yet in reality liberation is his characteristic. 'True and real' means seeing permanence and being permanent; this is that person. 'Showing the path' means showing the right path to sentient beings. 'Visible' means showing himself as identical to humans, hence he is seen. Baoliang comments: 'The Tathāgata is the characteristic of awakening' refers to the dharmakāya of the ultimate fruition, the true and real Buddha-jewel. 'Whose essence is permanence, bliss, self, and purity' means being fully endowed with all virtues. 'Showing the path and visible' next clarifies the response Buddha-jewel. If genuine and response are understood, this is wholesome, practicing in accordance with the Dharma.
51.37
"How does a bodhisattva know the characteristics of the Dharma? […] this is called a bodhisattva knowing the characteristics of the Dharma."
51.38
Daosheng comments: There is nothing that is not Dharma that constitutes the Dharma. It is manifested in persons and proclaimed to sentient beings, taking causing people to practice wholesomeness as primary; hence it first raises wholesome and unwholesome. Attaining the principle is wholesome; diverging from the principle is unwholesome; both corresponding to what is real, they constitute the Dharma. 'Permanent, impermanent' up to 'pure, impure' fundamentally lies in being non-inverted regarding the four; this is the correct essence of the Dharma. As for 'whether knowing or not knowing,' because within the Dharma there is no unknowing, it further takes knowing and not knowing as the Dharma. As for 'whether understanding or not understanding,' propagating the Dharma lies in words, and grasping the import constitutes understanding; hence it further takes understanding and not understanding as the Dharma. As for 'whether true or not true,' diverging from truth constitutes non-Dharma; hence it further takes true and not true as the Dharma. As for 'whether cultivating or not cultivating,' propagating the Dharma values cultivation and study; hence it further takes cultivating and not cultivating as the Dharma. As for 'whether being a teacher or not being a teacher,' the Dharma manifest makes a teacher; hence it further takes being a teacher and not being a teacher as the Dharma. As for 'whether real or not real,' since it is true it is real, and once the real is manifested, right and wrong are settled; hence it further takes this as the Dharma. Sengzong comments: 'Wholesome and unwholesome' distinguishes the two jewels; all the rest constitutes the Dharma. Investigating according to the text, it seems that general and specific have not yet divided the Dharma into two names. When designations are applied and the expressed meanings are divided, because the two jewels are distinct, the Dharma and the true characteristic are divided in breadth. Baoliang comments: Knowing the Dharma means simultaneously knowing the two truths, ultimate and conventional, of the six practices.
51.39
"How does a bodhisattva know the characteristics of the Saṅgha? […] this is called a bodhisattva knowing the characteristics of the Saṅgha."
51.40
Daosheng comments: Although many and formless, each is a single person. But because the Dharma cannot be different, they then form a saṅgha. Having no difference means permanence; harmony means constant bliss. Not being destroyed by external things is called self. Not admitting the arising of outflows is called purity. 'The characteristic of a disciple' means that the assembly does not awaken on its own, but naturally has a teacher. 'The characteristic of being visible' means that the many principles reside in persons, hence they can be seen. 'Wholesome' means that none can oppose it; this is permanent wholesomeness. 'True or not true' up to 'real or not real' means that the nature is originally true, completely without falsity; if one has not yet probed the principle to the end, how could it be real? Sengzong comments: 'Permanence, bliss, self, and purity' first raises the Saṅgha of the fruition stage. 'Being the characteristic of a disciple' is the Saṅgha of the causal stage. 'The characteristic of being visible' means cultivating the understanding of the middle way and seeing the buddhadhātu. Baoliang comments: If they are harmonized in ultimate distinct bodies, such is the true Saṅgha. If they are the noble assembly of the three vehicles on the stage of training, this is the characteristic of disciples. Knowing the difference between these two kinds of Saṅgha is also practicing in accordance with the Dharma.
51.41
"How does a bodhisattva know the true characteristic? […] the distinct characteristics of dharmas such as empty space."
51.42
Daosheng comments: 'Permanent, impermanent' up to 'pure, impure' means that the true characteristic refers to the principle, and thus differs from the Dharma. Humans diverge from it on their own and are inverted regarding the four; being non-inverted in the four is the root of the principle. 'Wholesome and unwholesome' means that diverging from the principle is unwholesome, while turning back to it constitutes wholesomeness. As for 'whether existing or not existing, whether seen or not seen,' the principle is hidden as if non-existent, and also as if there is nothing to be seen. As for 'whether nirvāṇa, liberation, and cessation,' diverging from the principle produces bondage, while attaining the principle brings nirvāṇa, liberation, and cessation. As for 'whether knowing or not knowing,' within the principle there is no unknowing. As for 'whether realized or not realized,' the principle is hidden as if difficult to comprehend, yet clearly realizable and knowable. As for 'whether cultivating or not cultivating,' cultivation must obtain its function. 'This is called the true characteristic, not being nirvāṇa, etc.' means that these seven meanings share the same principle, but their imports are not identical. Their non-identity is different from beginning to end; bringing them together is sufficient. Sengzong comments: 'Permanent and impermanent' means that corresponding to characteristics constitutes the real. Baoliang comments: It also does not differ from the meaning in the real truth above.
51.43
"Good son! Bodhisattva-mahāsattvas […] for the sake of sentient beings speak of the existence of conventional truth."
51.44
Daosheng comments: 'Not seeing empty space' means that empty space itself manifests no emptiness; one who knows emptiness does not see emptiness; here it is used as an analogy for principle, with the concluding phrase clarified later. 'If the absence of things is called empty space, such empty space is then called real' means that having the characteristic of empty space would make it a thing of the three realms; because of the absence of things, it is genuine and real. 'Because it is real, it is called permanently non-existent' means that the emptiness of the absence of things has a principle without change, being permanently non-existent. 'Because it is permanently non-existent, it lacks bliss, self, and purity' means that since it lacks the characteristic of emptiness, it also lacks permanence, bliss, self, and purity. Its meaning lies in non-existence; one cannot call it existent, and this is why it exists. 'Just as in the world the absence of things is called emptiness' refers simply to the emptiness of physical form; taking the absence of things as the emptiness without characteristics is an analogy. Sengzong comments: 'Only the wisdom eye sees it' means seeing it as non-existent. 'Because of light it is called empty' means that having the function of transmitting light constitutes empty. Empty space is great empty space; it is a word for the absence of things. Non-Buddhists constantly say that empty space can be created; if one understands that empty space is not a dharma that can be created, this is also practicing in accordance with the Dharma. Therefore, the Buddha below borrows an analogy, saying that just like conventional truth, it truly lacks its own nature; he simply speaks of these causes and conditions for the sake of sentient beings, yet conventional truth is originally empty from the beginning and has never existed even for a moment. Now empty space is also like this: simply because of the absence of things, it is called empty space; where else could an empty space be found?
51.45
"Good son! The essence of nirvāṇa is also like this: […] at the time of sambodhi, it is called the bliss of bodhi."
51.46
Daosheng comments: As for 'the substance of nirvāṇa', nirvāṇa itself expresses the absence of nirvāṇa, identical with empty space. As for 'the locus of severing the afflictions', it is because the locus of severing is named 'cessation' that it is in fact the absence of cessation. As for 'is precisely permanent', the cessation of non-cessation is precisely permanent bliss, and is not allowed to be identical with empty space. As for 'the bliss of quiescent cessation', since it is called bliss, for fear of confusion it must be clarified. When it says the Tathāgata has two kinds of bliss, it means the bliss of non-knowing. The real mark has three blisses. The first, bliss of sensation, is also posited as this bliss even though grasping it as real is not the unconditioned. The one bliss of the buddhadhātu means that the bodhisattva's buddhadhātu has no [actualized] bliss, because there will be the bliss of bodhi. / Sengzong comments: 'The substance of nirvāṇa is simply the severing of afflictions' precisely means liberation from all encumbrances; it takes the absence of all encumbrances to be nirvāṇa. 'Is precisely permanent bliss' speaks of absence in terms of wisdom; how could this not be permanent bliss? Although it is not the bliss of sensation, nor is it the same as the bliss of the three sensations, yet because it is quiescent and free of suffering, it is termed bliss. The Tathāgata's two kinds of bliss: because they do not pertain to the causal stage, they lack the bliss of sensation; the real mark pertains to both cause and effect, and therefore possesses all three blisses. The one bliss of the buddhadhātu: the principle of natural authenticity is not the meaning of the spirit-mind, and therefore it is neither cognitive awareness nor the bliss of sensation. 'When attaining bodhi it is called the bliss of bodhi' means it is precisely the bliss of quiescent cessation; names are applied progressively, which is why it is called the bliss of bodhi. / Baoliang comments: To clarify the substance of nirvāṇa: it is also like empty space having no abiding locus. The wonderful substance of the Buddha fruit, true suchness without marks—how could there be a location to be sought? Yet the dharmatā has no nature or mark, not different from empty space. And that wherein it differs lies in ultimate emptiness. Having discussed it in terms of substance and marks, for fear that people might harbor doubts, he subsequently distinguishes it in terms of function; hence he raises permanence, bliss, and self to mark its characteristics. The Buddha having two blisses: the bliss of quiescent cessation is stated in terms of substance and marks; the bliss of cognitive awareness is distinguished in terms of function. The real mark having three blisses: the bliss of sensation is real, being the real within the empty. The remaining two are not different. The above pertains to the fruit, revealing real bliss. The buddhadhātu has only one bliss, because it will be seen.
51.47
At that time, Noble King Bodhisattva Radiance-All-Pervading […] "how could such false and deceptive words be uttered?"
51.48
Sengliang comments: There are three levels of objection. First, to prove that the extinction of body and wisdom is nirvāṇa, not merely the extinction of afflictions; second, to prove that the extinction of residual habits is nirvāṇa, not merely the extinction of afflictions; third, to prove that the extinction of the body, these three things, is precisely nirvāṇa. 'Fixing the term Himself at three months' uses temporal affairs to re-prove that the extinction of body and wisdom is nirvāṇa. / Sengzong comments: The arising of this objection stems from the previous explanation of nirvāṇa saying that it is simply the locus of severing, formulating an objection based on those words. Here there are four propositions, arguing that the locus of severing should not be nirvāṇa. The intention of the objection cites past teachings, wishing to make nirvāṇa identical with empty non-existence. The first objection says: When Māra came and besought Him, why did He not enter [nirvāṇa]? The Buddha Himself answered: 'I do not yet have disciples of wide learning.' One should know that it is the locus where body and wisdom are exhausted, not merely where afflictions are exhausted. The second raises that because bodhisattvas make determinations, one knows that the locus of severing is not necessarily it. The third: Māra besought Him again, and the Buddha answered him: 'After three months I shall enter.' And since these words 'I shall enter' came from the Buddha's own mouth, how could it be merely the locus of severing? The intention of the fourth objection takes the initial attainment of buddhahood to be nirvāṇa. The previous third completes the first proposition, and now the fourth completes the second. / Baoliang comments: From here on, relying on the above, it was explained that nirvāṇa is simply the locus where the buddhas sever afflictions. People then had doubts, thinking it was still the former nirvāṇa with remainder. Noble King now poses questions to dispel this, generally relying on three kinds of analogies with an infant to clarify the unreality and reality of nirvāṇa. The first holds that without remainder should be correct, and with remainder should not be. Why so? Long ago by the Nairañjanā River, the Tathāgata told the Demon King: 'I will not enter now.' The second objection, from 'If the severing of afflictions is not nirvāṇa' down to 'This present body of mine is precisely nirvāṇa', means that not only is without remainder correct, but with remainder should also be correct. Why is that? Long ago the Buddha told the brāhmaṇa Jātakarṇa: 'This present body of mine is precisely nirvāṇa.' Since the Tathāgata's body was not yet extinguished and yet He said 'it is precisely it', should one not use [nirvāṇa] with remainder to constitute nirvāṇa? The third objection says: In terms of principle, both should not be correct. Otherwise, one should be correct and the other incorrect. If both are incorrect, how could the Buddha utter such false words? Although the words of the objection here are many, the main intention of the objection does not go beyond these three. From 'In the country of Vaiśālī' on down, all come to prove the intention of the first objection, that without remainder should be nirvāṇa. Since the Tathāgata Himself set a term of three months, should one not precisely use death and extinction to constitute nirvāṇa?
51.49
At that time the World-Honoured One told Radiance-All-Pervading […] "Whatever words are uttered are sincere, true, and not false."
51.50
Sengzong comments: This answers the four objections. / Baoliang comments: This answers the third objection. It clarifies that were it not for the capacity to respond, the Buddha would not speak. It was because of what was suitable for sentient beings' dispositions that He made this statement.
51.51
"Good son, as you have said, long ago Pāpīmān […] thought that the Tathāgata was entering parinirvāṇa."
51.52
Sengliang comments: That remaining silent and saying nothing is precisely nirvāṇa answers the first objection. / Baoliang comments: From here on answers the first objection, clarifying that the Demon King did not recognize the true substance of nirvāṇa. He thought that the Buddha simply being silent and not expounding the Dharma was precisely nirvāṇa.
51.53
"Good son, the Tathāgata did not say that the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Saṅgha […] the two dharmas of purity have no difference."
51.54
Baoliang comments: In this brief reply, he first opens three propositions to explain the intention behind speaking in a concealed manner. It clarifies that when the Buddha first appeared in the world, sentient beings' wisdom was shallow and could not endure the profound Dharma; He could not speak of the three jewels of identical substance, but could only speak of severance, extinction, and without remainder as permanent, pure, and non-differentiated.
51.55
"Good son, the Buddha also did not say that the Buddha and the buddhadhātu […] are eternal, unchanging, and without difference."
51.56
Sengliang comments: The second explanation: He also did not say that the buddhadhātu and nirvāṇa are of one substance, but only spoke of the empty nirvāṇa without remainder as being eternal and unchanging.
51.57
"Good son, the Buddha also did not say that nirvāṇa and the real mark […] are permanent, unchanging, and without difference."
51.58
Baoliang comments: The third explanation clarifies that at that time He also could not say that nirvāṇa and the real mark are of one substance; He could only speak of the emptiness of without remainder as having permanent marks, being real, unchanging, and without difference.
51.59
"Good son, at that time, my śrāvaka disciples […] 'After three months I shall enter parinirvāṇa.'"
51.60
Baoliang comments: The reason He could only speak of the emptiness of without remainder as real was because there were indolent disciples.
51.61
"Good son, on account of such evil monks as these […] but I truly do not undergo ultimate extinction."
51.62
Sengliang comments: This answers the third objection. The meanings of the three jewels differ, but their permanence and purity do not differ; hence He spoke of one, not three. / Baoliang comments: He broadly reproves the faults of the śrāvaka disciples and praises the attainment of understanding the six practices. If they were truly aligned with partial study and had already aligned with the noble ones, here He should not have said that śrāvaka people are the retinue of Māra and not my disciples.
51.63
"Good son, just as a person blind from birth does not see the sun or moon […] 'After three months I shall enter nirvāṇa.'"
51.64
Baoliang comments: He makes an analogy for the śrāvakas.
51.65
"Good son, the Tathāgata foresaw that Kāśyapa Bodhisattva […] 'After three months I shall enter parinirvāṇa.'"
51.66
Baoliang comments: This clarifies that this was simply the Tathāgata manifesting the infant practice to receive and transform the lowly and foolish; it was appropriate to make this statement.
51.67
"Good son, for what reason did I in the past […] Demon King Pāpīmān that I would not enter parinirvāṇa?"
51.68
Sengliang comments: This answers the fourth, which raised past intentions to construct the objection. / Sengzong comments: He raises the first objection to answer it. In the past, saying that He did not yet have disciples of wide learning was for the sake of the five monks and others; hence He said He would not enter, which was not itself true nirvāṇa. / Baoliang comments: Next, answering the previous intention regarding not yet having disciples of wide learning: at that time, for the sake of one person whose faculties were ripe for cultivation, He therefore did not enter nirvāṇa.
51.69
"Good son, there is that which is named nirvāṇa but is not mahānirvāṇa […] it may also be termed mahāparinirvāṇa."
51.70
Sengliang comments: This answers the second objection. It clarifies that because of seeing the buddhadhātu, it can be called permanent and blissful. If one does not see the buddhadhātu, then residual habit energies are not yet exhausted, and one cannot attain permanence and self; but because fragmentary suffering is exhausted, it can only be called blissful and pure. / Sengzong comments: This answers the second question. It clarifies that because the bodhisattva has severed only a minor portion, it is not yet sufficient to be so named. / Baoliang comments: Next, answering the second objection regarding [nirvāṇa] with remainder: in the past, pointing to the locus of the absence of afflictions was with remainder, not pointing to the exhaustion of body and wisdom. Today, based on body and mind, established in accordance with what the practitioner severs, eradicating causes and extinguishing results, it is therefore termed 'named nirvāṇa'.
51.71
"Good son, *parini* means not, and *vāna* means to weave […] the meaning of being unimpeded is precisely named nirvāṇa."
51.72
Sengzong comments: This broadly explains the meanings of non-weaving and so forth, in order to establish the meaning of true nirvāṇa.
51.73
"Good son, there are Ulūka and Kapila […] fully accomplish the seventh merit."
51.74
Sengliang comments: Having already provided factual proof, he re-explains the name and meaning of nirvāṇa in terms of the existence within extinction. That severing afflictions is not named nirvāṇa: severing afflictions is wisdom, and the non-arising of afflictions is extinction. / Sengzong comments: Having clarified that the bodhisattva is not ultimate and only the Buddha is ultimate, then the fourth objection is naturally resolved. / Baoliang comments: This is a minor portion of freedom from suffering in the causal stage, not the exhaustion of all suffering; hence it is not named mahānirvāṇa. In the wonderful substance of the Buddha fruit, saṃsāra having been exhausted, the substance is free from affliction and trouble, afflictions do not arise again, and it is complete with all virtues—only then is it named mahānirvāṇa, not merely the locus of the absence of afflictions. Therefore, through five dharmas being of identical substance, it proves that the present nirvāṇa is different from that of the past. What are the five? First, clarifying that the Buddha does not give rise to afflictions again; second, clarifying that the substance thoroughly exhausts the principle of suchness; third, clarifying that the illumination of cognitive objects is complete; fourth, clarifying that universal response is unobstructed; fifth, clarifying that the substance is the real mark. Since it is equipped with these five virtues and wonderful existence permanently endures, how is this not the difference between present and past nirvāṇa?
51.75
Collected Commentaries on the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, Fascicle Fifty-One
Linked texts (1)
- 大般涅槃經集解 — Classical Chinese