大般涅槃經義記 5.10

5.10

Question: If that is illness practice, why does the text neither introduce it with a heading nor conclude it? Answer: General conventions for explaining meaning are twofold: First, directly discussing the dharma in itself requires an introduction and a conclusion. Second, relying on persons and events: directly presenting persons and events to express the dharma and leaving it at that; this is frequently the case in the sūtras. Thus, in the text below, it relies on persons to express the dharma: relying on King Ajātaśatru's repentance to eradicate the heinous crime of patricide, in order to reveal that the bodhisattva's repentance eradicates all karmic obstacles as illness practice. It is not merely taking that king's repentance of patricide as the bodhisattva's entire illness practice, and hence there is no heading or conclusion. Alternatively, that passage has a twofold meaning: repenting and eradicating transgressions is the king's illness practice; while rescuing all sentient beings guilty of heinous crimes and concurrently causing many people to generate the mind of awakening is the king's brahmacaryā practice. Because it has this twofold nature, it cannot be designated and concluded with reference to only one meaning.