大般涅槃經義記 1.22

1.22

Next, explaining its text: first, 'Thus' is explained, wherein it is first determined in relation to the person, and then explained. How is it determined? In the past it was mostly explained in relation to Ānanda: what Ānanda transmitted was as the Buddha had preached, hence it is called 'like' (ru); differentiating it from mere resemblance, it is further called 'this' (shi). Investigating this statement thoroughly, it is explained in relation to the Buddha, not in relation to Ānanda. How is this known? As the Dazhidulun says: ''Thus' (rushi) is an expression of faithful compliance; one who believes says, 'This matter is thus'; one who does not believe says, 'This matter is not thus.'' Ānanda manifests his own faithful compliance with the Buddha's words, declaring what the Buddha preached to be thus. Furthermore, the beginning of the Wenshi jing says: 'Ānanda said, 'I heard thus from the Buddha.'' Therefore, we know that Ānanda declared what the Buddha preached to be thus. It is only that the regional languages differ: that Wenshi jing conforms to the speech of this region, hence it says 'heard thus from the Buddha'; other sūtras mostly conform to the speech of foreign countries, first mentioning 'Thus' and afterward manifesting 'have I heard'. Such is a rough determination of it. How is it explained? As for the word 'Thus' (rushi), the explanation has two meanings: first, explaining in terms of dharmas: Ānanda says that what the Tathāgata preached is in accordance with (ru) all dharmas, hence it is called ru; preaching principle accords with principle, preaching phenomena accords with phenomena, preaching cause accords with cause, preaching fruit accords with fruit; all such statements in accordance with the Dharma accord with principle, hence called rushi ('thus'); indeed, because conflict with the Dharma is called wrong, statements in accordance with the Dharma can be called right (shi). Second, explaining in terms of persons: Ānanda says that what Śākyamuni now preaches is in accordance with (ru) the preaching of all past buddhas, hence called ru; being in accordance with the preaching of all buddhas accords with principle, hence called rushi; indeed, because conflict with what the Buddha preached is wrong, being in accordance with the preaching of all buddhas can be called right. As for the words 'have I heard' (wo wen): Ānanda, addressing future living beings, says that he received the preaching, hence called 'have I heard'. Hearing is actually done by the ear; why is it called 'I'? The various faculties are all instruments used by the self; it is named in terms of the master, hence called 'have I heard'. Within dharmas there is no person; why declare 'have I heard' in terms of a master? The explanation says: although there is no fixed master within dharmas, there is no lack of a provisional name governing living beings, hence it can be called 'I'. For example, when the four divisions of an army unite to form an army, although there is no fixed master, one can still say, 'Our army is brave and robust,' or 'Our army surpasses them.' This is also the same.