大般涅槃經義記 7.357

7.357

第三句中，「涅槃雖樂，非是受樂，是寂樂」者，前說是樂，懼同世受，故復辯之。於中先明雖樂非受，後明唯是寂滅之樂，分相如是。若據攝相，佛智即是大涅槃中波若所收，是即涅槃亦有知樂，故上文中宣說涅槃具足四樂，斷受寂滅，覺知不壞。今說非受，當前斷受；今說寂滅，當前寂樂。覺知是佛，故今不論。不壞是常，所以不辯。

In the third phrase: as for "Although nirvāṇa is bliss, it is not the bliss of sensation; it is the bliss of quiescence," because it was said earlier to be bliss, it was feared that it would be equated with worldly sensations, and hence it is explained again. Herein, it first clarifies that although it is bliss it is not sensation, and then clarifies that it is solely the bliss of quiescence and cessation; the distinct marks are like this. If based on the subsumption of marks, the buddha-wisdom is precisely subsumed under prajñā within the Mahāparinirvāṇa, which means that nirvāṇa also has the bliss of awareness; thus in the earlier text it was declared that nirvāṇa is fully endowed with four blisses: severing sensation, quiescence and cessation, and indestructible awareness. Here, stating that it is not sensation corresponds to the earlier "severing sensation"; stating quiescence and cessation corresponds to the earlier "bliss of quiescence". Awareness is the Buddha, and therefore is not discussed here. Indestructible is constancy, and is therefore not analyzed.