大般涅槃經義記 2.199

2.199

第三對中，迦葉初先難破如來不重生義，如鐵滅已還置火中，赤色復生，辯喻類法，如來若爾應還生結，徵佛同喻。下佛轉喻釋不重生，成前常義。於中，初先呵其難辭明非無常，「何以故」下明佛是常，先問、後辯。「如來是常」總立常義。下廣釋成，於中初明自結永斷故得為常，「無量生」下能斷他結故得為常。自中，初先轉喻顯常，「如鐵」已下復喻解難。前中初喻、次合、後喻，此則是其說後喻也。「如彼燃木滅已有灰」，立喻顯法。燃木有灰，喻有常體；灰不為木，喻結不生，故得為常。「煩惱滅已便有涅槃」約喻顯法，謂有真實常樂涅槃如彼灰矣。為牢其義故，「壞衣」下更以多喻顯成常義。下復就彼燒鐵之喻釋去其難。「如鐵冷已可使還熱」辯喻異法，良以彼鐵少分似法，故前為喻非為全同，故今彰異。「如來不爾」彰法異喻，如來不爾總明其異，「斷煩惱」等別明其異，「斷煩惱已畢竟清涼」，已生惑亡，煩惱熾火更不復生，當結不起。

In the third exchange, Kāśyapa first objects to and refutes the Tathāgata's principle of not being reborn: just as iron, after [its heat] is extinguished, is placed back into the fire and the red colour is born again, explaining the metaphor to assimilate the Dharma to it, if the Tathāgata were like this, he should again give birth to fetters, challenging the Buddha with the metaphor. Below, the Buddha alters the metaphor to explain not being reborn, establishing the previous meaning of permanence. Therein, he first rebukes his objections, clarifying that he is not impermanent; from 'for what reason?' onward, he clarifies that the Buddha is permanent, first questioning and then explaining. 'The Tathāgata is permanent' generally establishes the meaning of permanence. Below, he broadly explains and establishes it: therein, he first clarifies that because his own fetters are permanently cut off, he is therefore permanent; from 'innumerable births...' onward, because he can cut off the fetters of others, he is therefore permanent. Within [the section on] his own, he first alters the metaphor to reveal permanence; from 'like iron...' onward, he uses another metaphor to resolve the objection. In the former, first there is the metaphor, next the matching, and then [another] metaphor; this is the statement of the latter metaphor. 'Just as that burning wood, after being extinguished, leaves ashes' establishes a metaphor to reveal the Dharma. That burning wood leaves ashes illustrates that there is a permanent substance; that ashes do not become wood illustrates that fetters are not reborn; therefore he is permanent. 'Afflictions being extinguished, there is then nirvāṇa' reveals the Dharma in terms of the metaphor, meaning that there is a real, permanent, and blissful nirvāṇa like those ashes. In order to solidify its meaning, from 'ruined robes...' onward, he further uses multiple metaphors to reveal and establish the meaning of permanence. Below, he again refers to that metaphor of glowing iron to explain away his objection. 'Just as iron, having cooled, can be made hot again' explains how the metaphor differs from the Dharma; precisely because that iron only partially resembles the Dharma, it was previously used as a metaphor but not as completely identical, and so he now manifests the difference. 'The Tathāgata is not like this' manifests how the Dharma differs from the metaphor: 'the Tathāgata is not like this' generally explains the difference; 'severing afflictions,' etc., individually explains the difference: 'having severed afflictions, he is completely and ultimately cool'—the delusions already arisen are destroyed, the blazing fire of afflictions never arises again, and future fetters do not arise.