大般涅槃經義記 6.389

6.389

下次明其化小菩薩，「如彼嬰兒於非男女生男女想」起化所隨，偏舉其喻。「如來亦」下合第二句明佛化想。「而實無生」超合第四，「實非男女」明化小真。「若佛如來說無」已下却合第三，「即止不啼」明化有益，於中有二：一約世諦眾生之相合止不啼、二「若於眾生破眾生」下約就真諦合止不啼。前中「如來說無眾生，一切眾生即墮耶見」反明有啼，「是故如來說有眾生」順明不啼。此言略少，若具，應言如來說有眾生相故則破耶見。約真諦中，「若於眾生作生想者則不能破」反明有啼，「若於眾生破眾生」下順明不啼，「是名」總結。

Next, it clarifies transforming lesser bodhisattvas: "Just as that infant forms the notion of men and women with respect to what are not men and women" sets forth that which the transformation accommodates, uniquely citing the simile. From "The Tathāgata also" onward matches the second phrase, clarifying the Buddha's notion in transforming. "And yet there are actually no sentient beings" matches ahead to the fourth phrase: "actually not men or women" clarifies that the transformation is not real. From "If the Buddha, the Tathāgata, spoke of non-existence" onward steps back to match the third phrase: "immediately ceases, crying no more" clarifies that the transformation is beneficial, within which there are two parts: 1. matching the cessation of crying in terms of the marks of sentient beings in conventional truth; 2. from "If, with respect to sentient beings, one destroys [the notion of] sentient beings" onward matches the cessation of crying in terms of ultimate truth. In the former, "If the Tathāgata speaks of the non-existence of sentient beings, all sentient beings will immediately fall into wrong views" explains crying by negation; "Therefore the Tathāgata speaks of the existence of sentient beings" explains not crying by affirmation. These words are abbreviated; if complete, it should say that because the Tathāgata speaks of the existence of the marks of sentient beings, he thereby destroys wrong views. In terms of ultimate truth, "If one forms the notion of sentient beings with respect to sentient beings, then one cannot destroy it" explains crying by negation; from "If, with respect to sentient beings, one destroys sentient beings" onward explains not crying by affirmation; "This is named..." concludes as a whole.