大般涅槃經義記 3.25

3.25

初中有四：一如來立喻、二反問迦葉、三迦葉正答、四如來讚嘆。就立喻中，舉佛法身不可得殺，類明非喻；「欲害得罪」，類顯為喻。初言「有人」喻佛應身；內具四辨名「執刀劍」；怒意說真名「以瞋心」；欲以眾喻況佛法身，說相逼真名「害如來」；法身平等，不隨相變，故言「如來和無瞋色」。下次反問，「是人當得壞如來身？」是其一問，「成逆罪不？」復是二問。迦葉答中，初辨喻相，後約顯法。喻中，初先對上初問，明佛叵殺，顯成非喻。「直以惡心」對向後問，明由惡心故成無間，顯成為喻。前中初言「不也」，總答佛不可殺，故言不也。「何以故」下釋成叵殺。「如來身界不可壞」者對問辨釋。身性名界，人身分齊亦名身界。法身離相，故不可壞。「者何」已下，轉釋不壞所以，徵問佛所以身偏不可壞。「以無身」者，明身離相，故不可壞。「唯法性」下，明身體寂，故不可壞。「是人」已下，結成不壞。答後問中，「直以惡心成無間」者，化意違真名為惡心，成其譬喻言說之事名成無間，無間之義後別具論。下約顯法，「以是因緣引諸譬喻知實法」者，偏約後句，明為喻也。以是惡心，亦得成就無間因緣。佛引諸喻得令大眾知佛真法；亦應約初明其非喻，略不明也。佛讚可知。

Within the first, there are four points: 1. the Tathāgata sets up the analogy; 2. he questions Kāśyapa in return; 3. Kāśyapa answers correctly; 4. the Tathāgata praises him. In setting up the analogy, he adduces that the Buddha's dharmakāya cannot be killed, analogously clarifying non-analogy; "desiring to harm and incurring sin" analogously reveals it serving as an analogy. Initially, "there is a person" is an analogy for the Buddha's nirmāṇakāya; internally possessing the four unobstructed knowledges is called "holding a knife and sword"; speaking of the real with an angry intention is called "with an angry mind"; desiring to use manifold analogies to liken to the Buddha's dharmakāya, and speaking of characteristics to approach the real, is called "harming the Tathāgata"; the dharmakāya is equanimous and does not change along with characteristics, hence it says "the Tathāgata is harmonious and has no appearance of anger." Next is the counter-question: "Would this person succeed in destroying the Tathāgata's body?" is one question; "Would they incur a heinous offense or not?" is the second question. In Kāśyapa's reply, he first analyzes the characteristics of the analogy, and later applies it to reveal the Dharma. In the analogy, he first addresses the previous first question, clarifying that the Buddha cannot be killed, revealing the establishment of non-analogy. "Merely with an evil mind" addresses the subsequent question, clarifying that because of the evil mind one incurs [retribution in] the Avīci [hell], revealing the establishment of serving as an analogy. In the former, first saying "No" generally answers that the Buddha cannot be killed, hence saying "No." From "Why?" downward explains why he cannot be killed. "The Tathāgata's bodily realm cannot be destroyed" analyzes and explains in response to the question. The nature of the body is called "realm" (dhātu); the demarcation of a human body is also called "bodily realm." The dharmakāya is free from marks, hence it cannot be destroyed. From "why?" onward, it further explains the reason for its indestructibility, questioning why the Buddha's body specifically cannot be destroyed. "Because of having no body" clarifies that the body is free from marks, and therefore cannot be destroyed. From "Only dharmatā..." downward clarifies that the substance of the body is tranquil, and therefore cannot be destroyed. From "This person..." onward concludes its indestructibility. In answering the latter question, "merely with an evil mind one incurs Avīci" means that the intent to transform contrary to the real is called an "evil mind"; bringing about the matters of parabolic speech is called "incurring Avīci"; the meaning of Avīci will be discussed separately later. Below, applying this to reveal the Dharma: "Due to these causes and conditions, adducing various analogies to know the true Dharma" specifically applies to the latter clause, clarifying it serving as an analogy. Because of this evil mind, one also incurs the causal condition for Avīci. The Buddha adducing various analogies can enable the great assembly to know the Buddha's true Dharma; one should also apply the former to clarify its non-analogy, which is omitted and not clarified. The Buddha's praise can be understood.