大般涅槃經義記 2.51

2.51

下為會通，今言異昔，故須會通。於中且就我與無我一對會通，餘類可知。比丘先問「昔說無我修學有益，能斷煩惱，得入涅槃。」今復說我以為真實，是義云何？下佛答之，先嘆，後會。會中先喻，次合顯法，「如大醫」下牒以結勸。喻中有二：一昔說無我喻；二「其後不久王復病」下，今說真我喻。前中復二：一外道說我喻；二「時有明醫從遠方」下，聖說無我喻。外道說中，「如王闇鈍」，明所化愚，如舍利等在俗之時各有匡領，故說為王。內無解慧，名為闇鈍。所知淺狹，故曰少智。「有一醫」下，明能化癡，於中有四：一能化人癡、二所化不別、三重明其能化人癡、四重彰其所化不別。就初段中，富蘭那等六師之徒邪法訓世名為醫師，心不覺法名之為頑，口無正言說以為囂。自下第二所化不別，加以敬養名賜俸祿。自下第三重復廣前能化人癡，「療治眾病純以乳」者，不知廣治，說我為乳。「亦復不知病起」已下，不知正治。於中初言「不知病」等，明不識病。「雖知乳藥復不善解」，明不別藥。「風、冷、熱病悉教服乳」，明不解治。風病喻瞋，以躁急故；冷病喻癡，以頑騃故；熱病喻貪，以燒心故。煩惱非一名一切病，齊教計我名悉服乳。自下第四重復明其所化不別，「不別是醫知乳好醜及善惡」者，好醜據體，善惡論用。

Below, it reconciles [the teachings]; since the present words differ from the past, they must be reconciled. Within this, it temporarily reconciles the single pair of self and non-self; the rest can be known by analogy. The monks first asked: "In the past it was taught that cultivating and learning non-self is beneficial, able to sever afflictions and attain entry into nirvāṇa. Now you again speak of self as genuine; what is the meaning of this?" Below, the Buddha answers them, first praising and then reconciling. In the reconciliation, there is first an analogy, next an application that reveals the Dharma, and from "Like a great physician..." onward, he cites it to conclude with an exhortation. In the analogy, there are two parts: 1) the analogy of the past teaching of non-self; 2) from "not long after that, the king was sick again..." onward, the analogy of the present teaching of the true self. The former also has two parts: 1) the analogy of non-Buddhists teaching a self; 2) from "At that time, there was an intelligent physician from a distant land..." onward, the analogy of the Noble One teaching non-self. In the non-Buddhists' teaching: "like a king who is dull and obtuse" clarifies the ignorance of those being transformed; just as Śāriputra and others each had domains they governed when in secular life, they are spoken of as kings. Lacking internal wisdom of understanding is called dull and obtuse; what they knew was shallow and narrow, hence "little wisdom". From "There was a physician..." onward, it clarifies the folly of the one who transforms, within which are four parts: 1) the folly of the person who transforms; 2) the lack of discernment in those being transformed; 3) reiterating the folly of the person who transforms; 4) reiterating the lack of discernment in those being transformed. In the first section, the followers of the six masters such as Pūraṇa who instructed the world with perverse dharmas are called physicians; their minds not awakening to the Dharma is called stubborn, and their mouths having no correct words is spoken of as clamorous. The second section below, where those transformed lack discernment, refers to offering reverence and support, called granting stipends. The third section below expands once more on the folly of the person who transforms: "curing all illnesses solely with milk" means not knowing broad treatments, speaking of the self as milk. From "nor did he know the arising of illness..." onward, it means not knowing correct treatment. Within that, first saying "did not know the illness..." clarifies not recognizing the illness. "Although he knew milk medicine, he furthermore did not understand it well" clarifies not distinguishing medicines. "For wind, cold, and hot illnesses, he taught taking milk for all of them" clarifies not understanding treatments. Wind illness is an analogy for anger, because of its agitation and impetuosity; cold illness is an analogy for folly, because of its stubbornness and dullness; hot illness is an analogy for greed, because of its burning of the mind. Afflictions being many is called all illnesses; universally teaching the grasping of a self is called taking milk for all of them. The fourth section below reiterates that those transformed lack discernment: "not distinguishing whether this physician knew milk to be good or bad, wholesome or unwholesome"; "good or bad" is based on the substance, while "wholesome or unwholesome" concerns its function.