大般涅槃經義記 8.316

8.316

上來就凡明有縛解，下論二乘有兩問答。師子初先乘前難後。「若有名色是繫縛者，諸阿羅漢未離名色亦應繫縛」。佛答有二：一約有餘涅槃以答、二「譬如」下約就無餘涅槃以答。前中，初先汎舉二脫，次列其名。斷生死因名為「子斷」，滅生死果名為「果斷」。下約二脫以答其問。答意如何？明阿羅漢現無煩惱故無子縛，陰身未滅故有果縛。文有四句：一明羅漢已斷子縛；二「未斷果」下明有果縛，於中初先明其有縛，「不見佛性不得菩提」彰其無解；三「以是義故可言果縛」結前第二，「不得說言名色繫縛」結前第一。

The preceding section explained the presence of bondage and liberation with respect to ordinary persons; below, it discusses the two vehicles with two questions and answers. First, Siṃhanāda takes up the preceding to object to what follows: "If the presence of name-and-form is bondage, all arhats have not yet departed from name-and-form, so they should also be bound." The Buddha's answer has two parts: first, an answer in terms of nirvāṇa with residue; second, from "for example" onward, an answer in terms of nirvāṇa without residue. In the first part, first he generally adduces the two liberations, and next lists their names. Severing the causes of birth-and-death is called "severance of seeds"; extinguishing the fruits of birth-and-death is called "severance of fruits." Below, he answers his question in terms of the two liberations. What is the meaning of the answer? It explains that because an arhat presently has no afflictions, he lacks the bondage of seeds; because the body of aggregates is not yet extinguished, he has the bondage of fruits. The text has four clauses: first, it explains that an arhat has already severed the bondage of seeds; second, from "has not severed the fruit" onward, it explains that he has the bondage of fruits, wherein it first explains that he has bondage, and "not seeing the buddha-nature, he does not attain bodhi" reveals that he lacks liberation; third, "for this reason one can speak of the bondage of fruits" concludes the preceding second clause; "one cannot say that name-and-form binds [him]" concludes the preceding first clause.