大般涅槃經集解 6.43

6.43

Daosheng comments: Having heard that nirvāṇa is like the worldly syllable *i*, they began to awaken to the fact that the intent of the past teaching of impermanence was confined to the three realms, and distantly indicated permanence.
Sengliang comments: This is accepting understanding and making an entreaty. Having heard the present analogy of the syllable *i*, they understand that the Buddha's past teaching that all is impermanent was an upāya. And this upāya is able to sever the actual fetters of the three realms—how delightful it is!
Fayao comments: When the Buddha taught the permanence of the syllable *i* nirvāṇa, he thereby already taught that what is not nirvāṇa is impermanent. Furthermore, from their present understanding they realized that the intent of the past teaching of impermanence lay in what is not the Buddha, and was precisely the means to indicate that the Buddha is permanent; this may well be called a delightful teaching.
Sengzong comments: The purport of the three meanings previously explained is profound and subtle; seeking it in one's mind, it is obscure and beyond one's ken. Directly hearing the proclamation of extinction, abandoning the responsive and returning to the fundamental, being forever separated from living beings, they were filled with sorrow and grief. Regarding 'delightfully teaching impermanence': the teaching of the syllable *i* is not what ordinary sentiments can understand; the road ahead is difficult to tread, so they retreat to cling to the former teaching. How is this shown? The Tathāgata's former teaching instructed me to train in contemplations such as impermanence and abandon the delusions of the three realms; practicing according to the teaching, one indeed transcends suffering, so it was not difficult. As for today's teaching: although he now speaks of permanence, I have not yet attained it. Since I have not yet attained it, the matter rests with the Tathāgata. Directly witnessing extinction, although there are words of permanence, I do not see the reality; if he does not abide, then the former teaching is what can be relied upon; hence they praise it. The elephant's footprint being supreme: the upper line praises the teaching, while this line praises the understanding arising from the teaching.
Baoliang comments: From here downward is the second section of the entreaty. For the general entreaty, the main purports are two: First, the Buddha taught the twenty-five states of existence and formulated the contemplation of the five approaches. Yet the Buddha remains permanent; one knows that up to the vajra[-like samādhi] is saṃsāra, and the final mind is permanent. I am a person capable of being taught, and the Buddha should abide in the world. Second, although the Buddha has taught the syllable *i* nirvāṇa for my sake, I do not know how to attain it. Within this second entreaty there are three sections: First, clarifying that I am a person capable of being taught and have a slight understanding, he thus first uses two analogies to praise the present five approaches of suffering, emptiness, and impermanence for eliminating delusions as superior to the past. Second, from 'the monarch' up to the analogy of the drunken man is the formal entreaty. Third, from the praise of the plantain downward, he clings to the former teaching to demand [the Buddha's presence]: if the Buddha does not abide in the world, I shall pursue my past training and apply it to the Buddha, practicing suffering and impermanence. 'Delightful' means finding delightful the contemplation of the five approaches in the 'Cunda Chapter' above. The 'Cunda Chapter' spoke of permanence and impermanence; now he merely praises the principle of impermanence. The principle of permanence contemplated from the past was originally not understood, so he temporarily reserves this principle as words of entreaty, saying, 'Since I do not understand, you should abide in the world to teach me. If I already understood today's purport of permanence, what need would there be to plead?'
Zhixiu comments: Below this is the fourth section, stripping away attachments. It has four divisions: first, direct attachment; second, stripping away attachment; third, requesting him to abide; fourth, the Buddha's reply. From here up to 'yet to hold various views, this cannot be', the first part finds the former teaching delightful and prepares a counter-entreaty.
Mingjun comments: From here down to 'the perception of non-self', this is the second part of urging inquiry, reversing the above to cite the superior dharma to urge inquiry. Since it is not what they understand themselves, they return to cling to the former teaching. It has three steps: First, urging the past teaching of impermanence, which I have already understood. Second, citing analogies like the monarch to clarify that what is not understood lies in today's teaching; if the Buddha does not abide, who will teach me to understand it? Third, citing praises of the teachings of non-self and so forth.