大般涅槃經集解 7.78

7.78

Daosheng states: If the past teaching of non-self in truth also expressed the self, why did the verbal teachings exclusively teach non-self so that one could be free from self, without teaching self, only to teach it now? Sengliang states: If the present cultivation is correct, what was the meaning of teaching it everywhere in the past? Fayao states: If possessing a self is true and non-self is not real, why was it not taught in the past, so that fortunately we would not have had the inversion of erroneously grasping it? These two teachings are like spear and shield; what is their purport? Sengzong states: This is the section on taking away the fruit, the fourth passage. The first took away the fruit; the second took away the cause; the third used the metaphor of the precious pearl to establish that what they cultivated was empty and unreal; this fourth passage explains and harmonizes the two teachings so that they do not conflict. Baoliang states: This is the seventh passage, harmonizing the two teachings. Since the 'Chapter on Grief and Lamentation', the monks have petitioned three times and the World-Honoured One has admonished three times, yet the assembly harbored only a single doubt; thus we know that from the beginning of the scroll up to here is not yet the primary exposition, but clearly serves as an overall exhortation and inquiry. This doubt arose from within the third exhortation. If its principle is so luminous, why was it not taught first in the past?