大般涅槃經義記 2.65

2.65

第五領解修行喻中，初先自行，後勸他修。自中「王聞讚言始知」，領解辭也。「即服病除」，修得益也。就勸他中，句別有四：一勸他修行。二「國人」下始聞不受，先呵其人，初瞋、後呵。受他邪語名「鬼所持」，自生邪想名「狂顛耶」。下呵其言，先呵、後瞋，文顯可知。三「王聞」下，推佛免過，先勸莫瞋，而下推佛，非下免過；四彼聞奉行。上來立喻，下次合之。先合昔說無我之喻，「為調生」下合後今說真我之喻。就前昔說無我喻中，文有兩段：一外道說我喻、二聖說無我喻，備如上辯，今但合後聖說無我。就所合中，喻文有三：一如來出世喻、二反迹同邪喻、三破邪通正喻，亦如上辯，今此但合初後兩段，中間不合。「比丘當知如來應等亦復如是，為醫出世」，合上第一復有明醫曉八術也。「降伏」已下超合第三破邪通正。於中喻文有其兩段：一遣邪人、二破邪法。如前廣辯，今具合之，「降伏一切外道邪醫，唱如是言：我為醫王」，合遣邪人，欲伏外道故唱是言。「無我」已下合破邪法。於中初言「無我人」等，正合斷乳。「比丘當知諸外道」下，懸取後喻，呵其所立。是中未合食木之喻。「是故如來唱言無我」，結說所以。以彼外道所說之我，如虫食木偶成字故，我言無我。「為調生」下，合後聖說真我之喻。喻文有五：一患機感聖喻、二聖說真我喻、三初聞不受喻、四聖為會通喻、五領解修行喻，備如上辯，然今但合第二、第四，餘三不合。「為調生故、為知時故」，如是無我，有因緣故亦說有我，合第二段王應乳服。為諸比丘除無我倒名為調生，知諸比丘應受大時名為知時，有此因緣故說其我。「如彼醫」下，合第四段會通之文。然上文中初立如虫食木之喻、次合舊醫、時王問下問答廣顯，今但合後重顯之文，餘略不合。「如彼良醫善知於乳是藥非藥」，牒舉前喻，向前明醫廣辯其乳有是甘露妙藥之義名知是藥，亦辯是毒名知非藥。下約顯法，「非如凡夫所計我」等，合知非藥。於中先舉外道說我差別種種，「如來說我不如是」下對之辯非。「何者我」下，合知是藥，先問、次辯。涅槃之體不同生死誑相虛假名之為實，出離情妄說之為真，體無遷轉是故云常，為眾德本說之為主，諸行所託故復名依，體無生滅名不變易。「是名」下結。

In the fifth [section], the parable of understanding, accepting, and practicing: first, one practices oneself, and later one encourages others to practice. In the part on oneself: 'When the king heard this, he praised it, saying: Now I understand' is the statement of understanding and acceptance. 'He immediately consumed it and the illness was eliminated' is the benefit gained through practice. In the part on encouraging others, there are distinctively four phrases: first, encouraging others to practice. Second, from 'The people of the country' downward, initially hearing and not accepting; first rebuking the person, initially with anger and later with rebuke. Accepting the heterodox words of others is called being 'possessed by a ghost'; giving rise to heterodox thoughts on one's own is called 'being mad and deranged.' Below, it rebukes their words, first rebuking and then becoming angry; the text is clear and can be understood. Third, from 'When the king heard' downward defers to the Buddha to avert fault: first encouraging them not to be angry, and from 'yet' downward deferring to the Buddha, and from 'not' downward averting fault; fourth, their hearing and reverently practicing. The above establishes the parables; next is applying them. First it applies the earlier parable of having expounded non-self; from 'In order to tame sentient beings' downward it applies the later parable of now expounding the true self. Within the earlier parable of having expounded non-self, the text has two sections: first, the parable of the non-Buddhists expounding the self; second, the parable of the sage expounding non-self, fully as distinguished above; now it only applies the latter [section] of the sage expounding non-self. Within what is applied, the parable text has three [parts]: first, the parable of the Tathāgata appearing in the world; second, the parable of reversing his traces to conform with the heterodox; third, the parable of refuting the heterodox to open up the correct, also as distinguished above; here it only applies the first and last two sections, leaving the middle unapplied. 'Bhikṣus, you should know that the Tathāgata, Arhat, [Samyaksaṃbuddha] is also like this: appearing in the world as a physician' applies to the earlier 'there was another clear-sighted physician skilled in the eight arts.' From 'Subduing' downward jumps to apply to the third, refuting the heterodox to open up the correct. Within it, the parable text has two sections: first, dismissing the heterodox persons; second, refuting the heterodox teachings. As broadly distinguished before, they are now combined and applied: 'subduing all the heterodox physicians, he made this declaration: I am the king of physicians' applies to dismissing the heterodox persons, making this declaration to subdue the non-Buddhists. From 'no self, no person' downward applies to refuting the heterodox teachings. Within this, the opening words 'no self, no person,' etc., directly apply to stopping [the use of] milk. From 'Bhikṣus, you should know that all non-Buddhists' downward anticipates the later parable to rebuke what they establish. Within this, the parable of eating wood is not yet applied. 'Therefore the Tathāgata proclaimed non-self' concludes with the reason for so expounding: because the self expounded by those non-Buddhists is like a worm eating wood and accidentally forming letters, I expound non-self. From 'In order to tame sentient beings' downward applies to the later parable of the sage expounding the true self. The parable text has five [sections]: first, the parable of the afflicted capacity evoking the sage; second, the parable of the sage expounding the true self; third, the parable of initially hearing and not accepting; fourth, the parable of the sage reconciling and harmonizing; fifth, the parable of understanding, accepting, and practicing, fully as distinguished above; yet now it only applies the second and fourth, leaving the other three unapplied. 'In order to tame sentient beings, and knowing the proper time'—just as non-self was taught, because there are causes and conditions, existence of self is also expounded, which applies to the second section where the king should consume milk. Eliminating the inversion of non-self for the bhikṣus is called 'taming sentient beings'; knowing the time when the bhikṣus should receive the Great [Vehicle] is called 'knowing the proper time'; because there are these causes and conditions, he expounds that self. From 'Just as that physician' downward applies to the text of the fourth section reconciling and harmonizing. In the text above, first the parable of the worm eating wood is established, next it is applied to the former physician, and from 'The king at that time asked' downward it is broadly clarified through question and answer; now it only applies the later text that reiterates and clarifies, leaving the rest omitted and unapplied. 'Just as that good physician well knows whether milk is medicine or not medicine' cites the previous parable; the previously mentioned clear-sighted physician broadly discriminated that the milk has the meaning of being a marvelous medicine of amṛta, which is called knowing that it is medicine, and also discriminated that it is poison, which is called knowing that it is not medicine. Below, it reveals the Dharma in terms of this: 'not like the self imagined by ordinary worldlings,' etc., applies to knowing it is not medicine. Within this, it first cites the various different kinds of self expounded by non-Buddhists; from 'the Tathāgata's expounding of self is not like this' downward discriminates what is not so in contrast to them. From 'What is the self?' downward applies to knowing it is medicine, first asking, next discriminating. The essence of nirvāṇa is not like the deceptive and false marks of birth and death, which is termed real; emerging from emotional delusions is termed true; its essence is without change or shift, therefore it is called constant; as the root of all virtues it is termed master; because all practices rely upon it, it is further termed refuge; its essence is without arising or ceasing, so it is termed immutable. From 'This is called' downward concludes.