大般涅槃經集解 6.61

6.61

Daosheng states: The past was taught by the Buddha, and the present is also taught by the Buddha; if past understanding was wrong, why must present [understanding] be right? Therefore, returning to cling to the past understanding, they submit it to the Buddha for judgment. Sengliang states: Saying the Tathāgata is permanent means, reasoning according to principle, he ought in principle to be sovereign. Yet today when we plead, he cannot remain, which means he is not sovereign. Thus the past statement of non-self is real, and the present statement of sovereignty must be false. 'As the Buddha taught' means both present and past were taught by the Buddha; why must the present teaching be entirely correct? Hence they cite the past to seek judgment. Fayao states: Ever since the 'delightful discourse', although the bhikṣus explained their own understanding, they had not yet verified it themselves. Now wishing to obtain a decisive ruling from the Buddha, they first present their past understanding, praising the notion of non-self as true. If the Buddha rejects it, then their present understanding is correct; if he does not reject it, why must their present understanding be right? The plantain analogy clarifies the understanding of non-self. The sap analogy speaks of the truth of the body: in principle it is naturally non-self, without needing to speak of mental understanding; the beauty of the saptaparṇa flower illustrates that practicing non-self allows one to enter nirvāṇa. Baoliang states: This is the third section: wanting to return to practicing the past teachings.