涅槃玄義發源機要 1.16

1.16

「釋其」下，依翻釋義。於中分二：初、且寄歷別為釋義故；次、正約圓融為顯理故。非前歷別無以顯後圓融，非後圓融無以會前歷別，故知圓融更無別法，但是達前三九互攝耳。復於二文皆徵下〈哀嘆品〉中祕藏之說以顯其義，於次第中引法說文用結三身，故云祕密藏者名大涅槃，伊字三點、首羅三目只是譬說，還譬三德，故無別途。今就義便，點是文字宜結解脫，目能照了宜結般若，至圓融釋乃取合譬之文以結其義，故云法身亦非等。故〈哀嘆〉所談祕藏，法譬合三義無別趣。既用法譬以證歷別、合文以證圓融，乃知二文義歸一揆。「不可見」下，斥云未是今經正意，便棄歷別別覓圓融。「若得此意至」下，釋經用別用圓處處多爾。秀出者，秀亦出也，又榮也。智境照發相應者，以智照境、由境發智，境大智大故曰相應。境即法身，智即報身。應身自在者，應遍法界如鏡現像。形對像現，故曰無能遏絕。非生非起者，前生即因，後起即果。「照無」下，以遍以足釋其圓義。照無不遍者，圓滅周遍，照三諦故。發無不足者，性滅具足，發三智故。雖境智雙舉，正顯報智圓滅耳。照遍故明窮，發足故境極。逗必會者，以四教法逗權實機，隨自隨他示生示滅，稱機無乖故曰必會。取必克者，義同上句。克，勝也。諸佛之師也者，諸佛即智，師即是境。境能發智，故稱佛師。非四即之此岸、非究竟之彼岸、非分真之中流，非能契智、非所契理，無始因、無終果，實相絕待故並非之，故云故名實相度。佛師度故諸佛亦度者，境既絕待，智亦絕待也，以境智不二故。此雖明智，正在示境。「論云」下，《釋論》讚般若偈也。境發智故，名佛善來。智照境故，名佛窮底。如如智等者，全境如為智如，故曰如如智；全智如為境如，故曰如如境。佛無礙者，即大義。自度度他者，自既出二死，亦令他出二死也。度他故彼利益，自度故我利益。一切周悉者，等彼十界故名周悉。淺深別異者，於三番中各有深淺也。法身則深、二身則淺；性淨涅槃一切種智則深，二淨二智則淺。身智脫不同，故別異。未是今經正意者，意本圓融，說有次第，今據所說故非經意。「意者」下，正約圓融三法。即三智等者，三法謂三法身也。以理智用皆可軌故，同受法名。三智即三般若，三點即三解脫，法身即一切種智性淨涅槃，報身即一切智圓淨涅槃，應身即道種智方便淨涅槃。「三法」下，兩番融即，初明九三相即、次明三一相即，良由九只是三、三只是一故也。三法即九法者，以身智脫各開三故。九法即三法者，以合三身為法身、合三智為般若、合三脫為解脫故。「不三而三」下，明三一互融。不得相離者，即三而一故。不得相混者，即一而三故。涅槃之名遍布諸處者，涅槃是安樂法，諸處即十法界，此乃約事以辨，故有十界淺深之殊。獼猴者，《毛詩草蟲經》曰「猱，獼猴也。楚人謂之沐猴。」騰枝躍樹者，後漢王延壽《王孫賦》曰「緣百仞之高木，攀窈褭之長枝。」河伯者，水神也，名天吳。《山海經》云「天吳，八首十八尾。」亦曰水伯，《援神契》曰「河者水之伯，上應天漢。」噞喁，上音驗，下牛凶切。《說文》云「眾口上見也。」《淮南子》曰「天且雨也，魚已噞噞。」修羅怖畏得歸依處者，謂與天主鬪戰奔北，故怖入藕絲中，即歸依處也。欲界報法等者，即人中飽足為樂，是報法也。斷欲界結等者，即第二十一文。多用善因者，謂斷結之言皆在人中，懸發上二界定，故云善因。「若三」下，〈嬰兒行品〉文也。八萬等者，初果八萬劫成菩提。六四二及十千，如次對二三四果及支佛。以由界內經生多少，故成菩提賖促有差。經有三文，第十云成菩提、十九云至大涅槃、二十云得阿耨菩提心。委釋如疏記。「釋論」下諸文，明菩薩法界，多明三教菩薩，或但取別教；今此乃以圓教分真名菩薩界。故知從初發心，即指初住，故引此經十住見不了了，證成其義唯取極果為佛界。問：三教菩薩及圓住前，何不明之？答：欲顯極果住大涅槃，是經正意，故且以真因為菩薩界。餘可準知，各有涅槃義也。隨情逐事者，十界事別各謂涅槃。此翻法勝者，亦法尚，是阿羅漢。佛滅度後八百年中，於《婆沙》中取三百偈以為一部，名雜阿毘曇。又撰《增一集》，文中解二涅槃，皆先立義、次引證，悉是今經第二十一文也。滅煩惱，即子縛斷。離諸有，即果縛斷。皆是有餘者，二乘雖斷果縛，無明全在，是故望佛仍是有餘，故引《勝鬘》證成其義。昔滅下，昔教小乘以灰斷為涅槃，故云是盡；今經大乘以常住為涅槃，故云非盡。「若依」下，約別義正斥。今昔相對者，昔小今大俱有涅槃，正是通途之義，非別顯今經圓極涅槃也。「若擘」下，蓋約別義以彈剝之也，故云義則不然。肌謂肌肉，理謂湊理。張平子《西京賦》曰「街談巷議彈射臧否，剖析毫釐擘肌分理。」注云「言此人彈剝善惡，雖毫釐肌理之間亦能分擘。」「何者」下，牒彼立義。所滅則異者，彼以滅煩惱為有餘，滅生死為無餘。「若爾」下，今師正難也。法尚既於小乘以斷見師子縛為有餘，斷生死果縛為無餘；若例大乘，亦應以破根本無明為有餘，破變易生死為無餘。此則大小兩教各有二種涅槃，高下碩異。小既未破無明，豈得以小所得二種為大乘有餘耶？汝今既以小乘二涅槃為大有餘，則應小乘已破無明入菩薩位也，故云若爾至同佛入無餘涅槃也。「何事」下，既若二乘已破無明入菩薩位，何故復被彈訶言非大乘耶？故云被訶言非也。「不斷」下，出訶小之文，不斷根本無明故、不到三德彼岸故、門外草菴非長者宅內故。「云何」下，結責也。此約別義，則大乘二種涅槃唯佛及證，不應對佛云小是有餘也。「又若」下，約通義例斥。通則九界皆應對佛稱為有餘，何但二乘？皆不得然者，然，是也。謂皆不是大乘有餘也。豈非佛性通耶者，安樂性即佛性也。前明涅槃，約事通於十界，如云寒獄以熱為樂等；今明佛性，約理通於十界，且取通義，故得例答。

From "Explaining its [meaning]" onward, the meaning is explained according to the translation. In this there are two parts: first, provisionally lodging in sequential distinctions to explain the meaning; second, directly taking the perfect interpenetration to reveal the principle. Without the preceding sequential distinctions there would be no way to reveal the subsequent perfect interpenetration; without the subsequent perfect interpenetration there would be no way to unite the preceding sequential distinctions. Therefore, one knows that perfect interpenetration has no other separate dharma; it is merely penetrating the mutual inclusion of the previous three and nine. Furthermore, both passages cite the exposition of the secret treasury in the "Grief and Lamentation Chapter" below to reveal their meaning. In the sequential exposition, the literal explanation is cited to conclude with the three bodies, hence saying that the secret treasury is called great nirvāṇa; the three dots of the letter *i* and the three eyes of Maheśvara are merely metaphorical expositions, yet they illustrate the three virtues, so there is no other course. Here, for the convenience of the meaning, the dots are characters and are suitably concluded as liberation; the eyes can illumine and understand, so they are suitably concluded as prajñā. Coming to the explanation of perfect interpenetration, the text of the synthesized metaphor is taken to conclude its meaning, hence saying that the dharmakāya is also not, etc. Thus the secret treasury spoken of in the "Grief and Lamentation [Chapter]" has no different goal across the three senses of dharma, metaphor, and synthesis. Since dharma and metaphor are used to prove the sequential distinctions, and the synthesized text is used to prove the perfect interpenetration, one knows that the meaning of the two passages returns to a single track. From "cannot be seen" onward, the critique says that this is not yet the correct intention of the present sūtra, yet one abandons the sequential distinctions to seek perfect interpenetration elsewhere. From "If one grasps this intention up to" onward, it explains that the sūtra uses the distinct and uses the perfect in many places just like this. "Surpassingly prominent": "prominent" (*xiu*) also means "to emerge"; it also means "flourishing." "Wisdom and the realm of objects shining and generating in mutual correspondence": using wisdom to shine on the realm of objects, and due to the realm of objects generating wisdom; because the realm of objects is great, wisdom is great, hence it is called "mutual correspondence." The realm of objects is the dharmakāya, and wisdom is the sambhogakāya. "The sovereign nirmāṇakāya": the response pervades the dharma realm just as a mirror reflects images. When a form faces it the image appears, hence it is said that nothing can obstruct or block it. "Neither produced nor arising": the former, "produced," is the cause; the latter, "arising," is the result. From "Illumining, there is none [it does not pervade]" onward, it explains its perfect meaning through "pervading" and "sufficiency." "Illumining, there is none it does not pervade": the perfect extinction is everywhere, because it illumines the three truths. "Generating, there is none it does not fulfill": the extinction of the nature is complete, because it generates the three wisdoms. Although both the realm of objects and wisdom are brought forward, it directly reveals the perfect extinction of the sambhoga wisdom. Because the illumination is pervasive, the clarity is consummate; because the generation is complete, the realm of objects reaches the utmost. "In reaching [beings], it will inevitably harmonize": using the teachings of the four teachings to reach the faculties of the provisional and real, in accord with oneself or in accord with others showing birth and showing extinction, tallying with faculties without divergence, hence it is said "will inevitably harmonize." "In taking up, it will inevitably succeed": the meaning is identical with the preceding phrase. "Succeed" (*ke*) means "to overcome." "The master of the buddhas": the buddhas are wisdom, and the master is the realm of objects. The realm of objects can generate wisdom, hence it is called the master of buddhas. It is not this shore of the four [stages of] identity; it is not that shore of ultimate [enlightenment]; it is not the midstream of partial reality; it is not the active wisdom that tallies; it is not the passive principle that is tallied with; it has no cause of beginninglessness, nor any result of finality; the true mark is beyond dualities, so all are negated, and thus it says, "hence it is named crossing over through the true mark." Because the master of buddhas crosses over, the buddhas also cross over: since the realm of objects is beyond dualities, wisdom is also beyond dualities, for the realm of objects and wisdom are non-dual. Although this clarifies wisdom, it is directly pointing out the realm of objects. From "The commentary says" onward, it is the verse praising prajñā in the *Explanatory Commentary* (*Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa*). Because the realm of objects generates wisdom, it is called the Buddha's "welcome arrival." Because wisdom illumines the realm of objects, it is called the Buddha "plumbing the depths." "Thusness-wisdom, etc.": taking the entirety of the thusness of the realm of objects to be the thusness of wisdom, hence it is called "thusness-wisdom"; taking the entirety of the thusness of wisdom to be the thusness of the realm of objects, hence it is called the "thusness-realm of objects." "The Buddha is unimpeded": this is the meaning of "great." "Crossing over oneself and crossing over others": having personally escaped the two kinds of death, one also causes others to escape the two kinds of death. Because of crossing over others, there is benefit to them; because of crossing over oneself, there is benefit to oneself. "Completely and thoroughly": because it is equal to those ten realms, it is called "thorough." "Shallow and deep differences": within the three cycles each has shallow and deep. The dharmakāya is deep, while the two bodies are shallow; the purity of nature nirvāṇa and the knowledge of all modes are deep, while the two purities and two wisdoms are shallow. The bodies, wisdom, and liberation are not the same, hence they are different. "Not yet the correct intention of the present sūtra": the intention is originally perfect interpenetration, but the exposition has sequence; judging now by what was spoken, it is not the sūtra's intention. From "The intention is" onward, it directly takes the three dharmas of perfect interpenetration. "Are identical to the three wisdoms, etc.": the three dharmas refer to the three dharmakāyas. Because the principle, the wisdom, and the function can all serve as models, they equally receive the name "dharma." The three wisdoms are the three prajñās; the three dots are the three liberations; the dharmakāya is the knowledge of all modes and the purity of nature nirvāṇa; the sambhogakāya is the knowledge of all [phenomena] and the purity of perfection nirvāṇa; the nirmāṇakāya is the knowledge of the paths and the purity of skillful means nirvāṇa. From "The three dharmas" onward, there are two cycles of fusion and identity: first clarifying the mutual identity of the nine and the three, and next clarifying the mutual identity of the three and the one; this is truly because nine is simply three, and three is simply one. "The three dharmas are the nine dharmas": because the body, wisdom, and liberation each open into three. "The nine dharmas are the three dharmas": because uniting the three bodies makes the dharmakāya, uniting the three wisdoms makes prajñā, and uniting the three liberations makes liberation. From "Not three and yet three" onward, it clarifies the mutual fusion of the three and the one. "Cannot be separated": because identity with the three is the one. "Cannot be confounded": because identity with the one is the three. "The name of nirvāṇa is spread through all places": nirvāṇa is the dharma of peace and bliss; "all places" means the ten dharma realms. This is distinguished in terms of phenomena, so there are differences of shallow and deep across the ten realms. "Macaque": the *Mao Commentary on the Shijing* for the poem *Caochong* says, "The *nao* is a macaque. The people of Chu call it *muhou*." "Leaping branches and springing through trees": Wang Yanshou's *Rhapsody on the Macaque* in the Later Han says, "Climbing tall trees of a hundred fathoms, clinging to the graceful, long branches." "The River Earl": the water spirit, named Tianwu. The *Shanhaijing* says, "Tianwu has eight heads and eight tails." He is also called the Water Earl. The *Yuanshenqi* says, "The River is the earl of waters; above it corresponds to the Heavenly Han [Milky Way]." "Opening and closing their mouths" (*yanyong*): the upper character is pronounced *yan*; the lower has the initial *ni-*, rime *-ong*. The *Shuowen* says, "Many mouths visible on the surface." The *Huainanzi* says, "When rain is about to fall, the fish already open and close their mouths." "The asuras in fear obtain a place of refuge": this refers to battling the Lord of the Devas and fleeing in defeat, thus in fear entering into the fibers of a lotus root, which is their place of refuge. "The retributive dharmas of the desire realm, etc.": this is finding bliss in being sated among humans, which is a retributive dharma. "Severing the fetters of the desire realm, etc.": this is the text of the twenty-first [fascicle]. "Mostly using wholesome causes": this means that the words about severing fetters all occur among humans, generating in advance the concentrations of the upper two realms, hence called "wholesome causes." From "If the three" onward, it is the text of the "Chapter on the Practices of an Infant." "Eighty thousand, etc.": the first fruit achieves bodhi in eighty thousand kalpas. Sixty, forty, twenty, and ten thousand correspond in order to the second, third, and fourth fruits and pratyekabuddhas. Because of the number of rebirths undergone within the realms, there is a difference in duration—tardy or swift—in attaining bodhi. The sūtra has three passages: the tenth says "attains bodhi"; the nineteenth says "reaches great nirvāṇa"; the twentieth says "obtains the mind of anuttara-bodhi." The detailed explanation is as in the commentary and subcommentary. The passages from "The commentary says" onward clarify the bodhisattva dharma realm, mostly clarifying the bodhisattvas of the three teachings, or only taking the separate teaching; here it takes partial reality of the perfect teaching to name the bodhisattva realm. Therefore one knows that "from the first aspiration of the mind" points to the first dwelling; hence citing this sūtra's ten dwellings seeing incompletely clearly to establish its meaning takes only the ultimate result as the Buddha realm. Question: Why are the bodhisattvas of the three teachings and those before the dwellings of the perfect [teaching] not clarified? Answer: Desiring to reveal the ultimate result abiding in great nirvāṇa is the correct intention of this sūtra, hence it provisionally takes the true cause as the bodhisattva realm. The rest may be inferred by analogy, as each has its sense of nirvāṇa. "Following inclinations and pursuing phenomena": according to the different phenomena of the ten realms, each calls it nirvāṇa. "Here translated as Fashang": also Dharmaśreṣṭhin, who was an arhat. Eight hundred years after the Buddha's parinirvāṇa, he took three hundred verses from the *Mahāvibhāṣā* to make one work, titled *Miśrakābhidharma-hṛdaya*. He also composed the *Ekottarikāgama Collection*; in the text explaining the two nirvāṇas, he always first establishes the meaning and next cites proofs, all of which are the text of the twenty-first [fascicle] of this sūtra. Extinguishing afflictions is the severing of the bondage of causes. Leaving all existences is the severing of the bondage of effects. "Both are with remainder": although the two vehicles have severed the bondage of effects, ignorance remains entirely present; therefore, viewed in comparison to the Buddha, it is still with remainder; hence the *Śrīmālādevī-sūtra* is cited to establish its meaning. From "In the past, extinction" onward: the past teaching of the small vehicle took extinction into ashes as nirvāṇa, hence it is said "it is exhaustible"; this sūtra's great vehicle takes eternal abiding as nirvāṇa, hence it is said "it is inexhaustible." From "If according to" onward, it directly refutes based on the distinct meaning. "Contrasting the present and the past": the past small [vehicle] and the present great [vehicle] both having nirvāṇa is strictly the common, general meaning; it does not distinctly reveal the perfect, ultimate nirvāṇa of the present sūtra. From "If one rips open" onward: this presumably uses the distinct meaning to peel back and scrutinize it, hence saying "the meaning is not so." *Ji* means flesh (*jirou*); *li* means the grain of the flesh (*couli*). Zhang Pingzi's *Rhapsody on the Western Capital* says, "Street talk and alley discussions praise and blame, judging good and bad, analyzing down to the hairsbreadth, ripping open the flesh and dividing the grain." The commentary says, "This means that when this person peels back and scrutinizes good and evil, even between a hairsbreadth and the grain of the flesh he is able to divide and rip open." From "Why?" onward, it restates his established position. "What is extinguished is different": he takes extinguishing afflictions to be with remainder, and extinguishing birth and death to be without remainder. From "If so" onward, our master directly presents the objection. Since Dharmaśreṣṭhin took severing the causal bondage of views and desires in the small vehicle as with remainder, and severing the result bondage of birth and death as without remainder; if one reasons by analogy to the Mahāyāna, one should also take destroying fundamental ignorance as with remainder, and destroying inconceivable transformation birth and death as without remainder. In this case, both teachings, the small and the great, each have two kinds of nirvāṇa, differing greatly in height and depth. Since the small [vehicle] has not yet destroyed ignorance, how could one take the two kinds obtained by the small to be the with-remainder of the Mahāyāna? If you now take the two nirvāṇas of the small vehicle as the Mahāyāna's with-remainder, then the small vehicle would have already destroyed ignorance and entered the bodhisattva stages; hence it says, "If so, up to entering the without-remainder nirvāṇa together with the Buddha." From "Why then" onward: if the two vehicles had already destroyed ignorance and entered the bodhisattva stages, why then would they be scolded and criticized as not being Mahāyāna? Hence it says, "being scolded as not." From "Not severing" onward, it brings out the passages criticizing the small [vehicle]: because of not severing fundamental ignorance, not reaching the other shore of the three virtues, and being a thatch hut outside the gate, not inside the elder's mansion. From "How could" onward, it concludes the reprimand. This is based on the distinct meaning: the two kinds of nirvāṇa of the Mahāyāna are realized only by the Buddha; one should not say in comparison to the Buddha that the small is with remainder. From "Furthermore, if" onward, it uses the shared meaning to refute by analogy. Under the shared [meaning], all nine realms should be called with remainder in comparison to the Buddha, so why only the two vehicles? "None can be so": "so" (*ran*) means correct; meaning that none are the Mahāyāna's with-remainder. "Could it not be that the Buddha-nature is shared?": the nature of peace and bliss is simply the Buddha-nature. Previously clarifying nirvāṇa was based on phenomena shared across the ten realms, as in saying that the cold hells take heat as bliss, etc.; now clarifying the Buddha-nature is based on principle shared across the ten realms; provisionally adopting the shared meaning, one can answer by analogy.