大般涅槃經義記 5.172

5.172

明不倒中，文殊先問，「如佛所說不倒名實」牒佛前言。「若爾，諦中有四倒不」就諦審問。「如其有」下就之設難：若四諦中有四倒者是則實諦不離四倒。云何上言無有顛倒名為實諦？一切顛倒不名為實。下佛為釋，「一切顛倒皆入苦諦」略明倒心是苦非實，倒應是集，報心為體，報心是苦，從體以名，故云入苦。又此倒心與苦作因生苦名苦，以是苦故四諦中有，不名實諦。「如眾生」下廣明倒心是苦非實，於中初先法說明倒，「譬如」已下喻說顯倒，「如是倒」下明倒是苦。

Regarding the explanation of non-inversion, Mañjuśrī first asks: 'As the Buddha has spoken, non-inversion is called the real' takes up the Buddha's earlier words. 'If so, are there the four inversions within the truths?' inquires with respect to the truths. From 'if there are' onward, he sets forth a challenge regarding this: If there are the four inversions within the four truths, then the real truth would not be apart from the four inversions; why did you say above that being free from inversion is called the real truth? All inversions are not called the real. Below, the Buddha explains for him: 'All inversions all enter into the truth of suffering' briefly explains that the inverted mind is suffering and not the real; inversion should be origin, having the retributive mind as its essence, and since the retributive mind is suffering, it is named according to its essence, hence it is said to enter into suffering. Furthermore, this inverted mind acts as a cause for suffering and produces suffering, hence it is named suffering; because it is suffering, it exists within the four truths and is not named the real truth. From 'just as sentient beings' onward, it broadly explains that the inverted mind is suffering and not the real; herein, first the explanation via dharmas explains inversion; from 'for example' onward, an explanation via metaphor reveals inversion; from 'such an inversion' onward, it explains that inversion is suffering.