大般涅槃經義記 3.7

3.7

名果不空，第九十一明非有無，先列其名。名中不足，若具，應言名不空空，為簡前門，單云不空。次釋其相，釋中初先約喻顯法，「彼瓶遇緣則有破」下簡法異喻。前中有三：一立喻顯法，「水、酒、酪瓶」舉其喻體，下辨喻相。於中初就水、酒等瓶明空不空；「雖無水」等，是空義也；「猶故得名為水等瓶」，不空義也，以有瓶體名為不空，非謂有其殘水、酒等名為不空。與上文中明雖滅盡燈爐猶存，其義相似。「如是瓶」下明空、不空不可偏定。「若言空」下破他空義。若言定空則不得有瓶體色、香、味、觸等事，破其定空。「若言不空復無水等」，破定不空。二約喻顯法，「解脫亦爾」合前瓶體。下合喻相，「不可說色及與非色」合前雖無水、酒等時猶故得名水、酒等瓶。「不可說空及以不空」合前不可說空、不空。「若言空」下，合前若空則不得有色、香、味、觸，若言不空而無水等。「以是」下結。三重法喻相對廣辨，於中初先就法明空。「空者謂無二十五有」，明無苦果。「及諸煩惱」，明無惑因。「無一切苦及一切相」，復明無果，以無二十五有果故則遠眾苦，亦離無常、無我等相，故說以為無一切苦及一切相。言「無一切有為行」者，明無業因，善、惡二業名有為行。初一「無」字貫通諸句。「如瓶無酪」舉喻以帖。下次就法以明不空，「謂實善色，常、樂、我、淨」，諸根相好，名為善色。「如瓶」已下舉喻以帖。「是故解脫猶如彼瓶」，結法同喻。上來約喻以辨解脫。人謂解脫全同彼喻，故下辨異。「彼瓶遇緣則有破壞」，明喻異法；「解脫不爾」，辨法異喻。結即可知。

"Named the fruit that is not empty" is the ninety-first [section], explaining the transcendence of existence and non-existence; its name is listed first. The name is abbreviated; fully stated, it should say "named the non-empty empty," but to distinguish it from the previous approach, it simply says "not empty." Next, its characteristics are explained. In this explanation, it first illustrates the Dharma by means of a metaphor; from "when that vessel meets with conditions, it breaks" onward, it distinguishes the Dharma from the metaphor. The former contains three parts: First, positing the metaphor to illustrate the Dharma. "Vessels for water, wine, and curds" adduces the metaphorical entities, and below this, the metaphorical characteristics are distinguished. Therein, it first explains emptiness and non-emptiness in terms of the vessels for water, wine, and so forth: "although devoid of water" and so forth expresses the meaning of emptiness; "it is still entitled a vessel for water and so forth" expresses the meaning of non-emptiness. Because the entity of the vessel exists, it is called not empty, not meaning that having remnants of water, wine, and so forth is called not empty. This is similar in meaning to the passage above explaining that although the lamp is extinguished, the lampstand still remains. From "such a vessel" onward, it explains that emptiness and non-emptiness cannot be one-sidedly determined. From "if one says it is empty" onward, it refutes the others' understanding of emptiness. If one says it is definitely empty, then there could not be the visible form, fragrance, flavor, and tangibility of the vessel's entity, thus refuting its definitive emptiness. "If one says it is not empty, yet it lacks water and so forth" refutes definitive non-emptiness. Second, applying the metaphor to illustrate the Dharma: "Liberation is also like this" corresponds to the entity of the vessel above. Below, it corresponds to the metaphorical characteristics: "It cannot be said to be form or non-form" corresponds to the earlier statement that although it lacks water, wine, and so forth, it is still entitled a vessel for water, wine, and so forth. "It cannot be said to be empty or non-empty" corresponds to the earlier statement that it cannot be said to be empty or non-empty. From "if one says it is empty" onward corresponds to the earlier statement that if it were empty, there could not be visible form, fragrance, flavor, and tangibility, and if one says it is not empty, it yet lacks water and so forth. From "therefore" onward is the conclusion. Third, broadly distinguishing the Dharma and metaphor in mutual correspondence. Therein, it first explains emptiness in terms of the Dharma: "Emptiness means being devoid of the twenty-five states of existence" explains the absence of the fruit of suffering; "and all afflictions" explains the absence of the cause of delusion; "free from all suffering and all marks" further explains the absence of the fruit, for because there is no fruit of the twenty-five states of existence, one is far removed from the multitude of sufferings and also free from the marks of impermanence, non-self, and so forth, hence it is spoken of as being free from all suffering and all marks. The statement "free from all conditioned formations" explains the absence of the cause of karma, for wholesome and unwholesome karma are called conditioned formations. The initial word "free" (無) runs through all the phrases. "Just as a vessel lacks curds" adduces the metaphor to match this. Next, it explains non-emptiness in terms of the Dharma: "Meaning real wholesome form, permanence, bliss, self, and purity"; the faculties and major and minor marks are called wholesome form. From "just as the vessel" onward adduces the metaphor to match this. "Therefore liberation is like that vessel" concludes the correspondence of Dharma to metaphor. Up to here, liberation has been distinguished by relying on the metaphor. People might think liberation is entirely identical to that metaphor, so below the difference is distinguished: "When that vessel meets with conditions, it is broken and destroyed" explains how the metaphor differs from the Dharma; "liberation is not like this" distinguishes how the Dharma differs from the metaphor. The conclusion can be known.