大般涅槃經集解 60.10

60.10

Sengliang comments: The third approach concerns existence and non-existence. When wisdom arises, it exists, which is called 'contact'; when it does not arise, it does not exist, which is 'non-contact'. 'The first thought should destroy them' means that a single thought would destroy all defilements; if so, then without contact—just as light and darkness are opposed, when light arises darkness has already passed away, and light does not reach darkness—then without contact one would be the same as an ordinary person. Baoliang comments: The third approach concerns the flow of speech. It seems as though it destroys when wisdom reaches the afflictions and does not destroy when it does not reach them, but the conceptual meaning is not so. As for the claim of being able to destroy: does it destroy when wisdom reaches the practitioner's mind, or does it destroy before reaching it? If it destroys before reaching, then ordinary people should destroy [them]. If it destroys because of reaching, then the very first thought should destroy them. But now the practitioner has immeasurable thoughts; if the first thought does not destroy, then subsequent thoughts are not needed. If it indeed destroys upon first contact, then this is non-contact. Wisdom arises and ceases thought after thought, never reaching each other at first—what meaning of contact or non-contact could there be? If one says that combining contact and non-contact enables destruction, there is also no such meaning.