涅槃玄義發源機要 2.3.1

2.3.1

Second, from "His treatise" downward, it evaluates the text of the treatise according to the four propositions. That treatise has in total nine refutations and ten expositions, making nineteen sections in all. What is now criticized consists of its subtle words and essential expressions excerpted from the above memorial of the ruler of the Qin, as well as the first [section], "Opening the Tenet," and the second, "Examining the Substance." None of them exceeds the four propositions, and hence they are cited in an intermingled fashion without forming a sequential order. Now, first, the text will be indicated and correlated, and next, its meaning will be elucidated. Within the initial proposition of existence, the first part is from the text of "Opening the Tenet." From "If there were no" downward, it is from the memorial. Within the subsequent proposition of non-existence, the first two sentences are from the text of "Opening the Tenet," which reads fully: "I have once ventured to state: As for the Way of nirvāṇa, it is serene, empty, and vast," and so forth. The single sentence below "How could there be" is from the text of the memorial, which reads fully: "Since it is called nirvāṇa, how could there further be any room for names within it?" Within the proposition of both [existence and non-existence], the sentence "Only in indistinctness and obscurity is there an essence within it" is language from the memorial; the remainder is language from "Opening the Tenet." The proposition of neither [existence nor non-existence] is entirely from the text of "Opening the Tenet." From "Yet wishing" downward, it reads fully: "This is indeed a realm of imperceptibility, a domain of the profoundest mystery; yet to wish to use existence and non-existence as labels to demarcate its territory and speak of its spiritual path—is this not exceedingly remote?" Next, in explaining the meaning: from "emerging and dwelling" to "provisional designation," abiding in the world with remainder is called "emerging," and entering extinction without remainder is called "dwelling"; these are both manifestations of birth and death shown in response to capacities. Since they have no real substance, they are both provisional designations. From "If there were no" downward, these were originally the words of the ruler of the Qin, criticizing the various masters who, in interpreting the ultimate truth, all held that it was vast, empty, and quiescent, without any sage. Therefore, Sengzhao adduced it: if the ultimate truth were vastly empty without a sage, who would know the ultimate truth? Since there is one who knows, this verifies that there is a sage. Hence that text says: "It is truly as the enlightened decree states." From "If there were no" downward, Master Sengzhao expands upon and clarifies the intention of the ruler of the Qin. The sage forgets conceptualizations, and in motion and stillness accords with the Way; hence it says "traveling with it." Regarding "this is the proposition of existence": since there exists a person capable of knowing and capable of traveling, how could this not be the proposition of existence? Regarding "this is the proposition of non-existence": since there is neither form nor name, nor is it known by a mind that conceives of existence, how could this not be the proposition of non-existence? Therefore, "it cannot be grasped as existing": this is "also non-existent." "It cannot be grasped as non-existing": this is "also existing." Huang means existing; hu means non-existing. Yao means secluded; ming means dark. That is to say, existence and non-existence are unfixed, secluded, dark, and difficult to fathom; hence it is called "indistinct and obscure." Although it is said to be difficult to fathom, there is a numinous luminosity and awareness whose marvel thoroughly endures; hence it says "there is an essence." Indistinct and obscure is "also non-existent"; having an essence is "also existing." Because the five aggregates are eternally extinguished, it is "also non-existent"; because the subtle spirit is inexhaustible, it is "also existing." Regarding "existence and non-existence are terminated within": being vacuous and unchanging, it cannot be deemed existent, and therefore existence is terminated; its supreme efficacy ever endures, and therefore non-existence is terminated. From "Designations" downward: since the substance of nirvāṇa terminates existence and non-existence internally, designations are obliterated externally. From "Seeing and hearing" downward, it explains the two sentences above. Because designations are externally terminated, it is beyond the reach of seeing and hearing in the two realms; because existence and non-existence are internally terminated, it cannot be fathomed by the formless [realm] and the four immaterial [attainments]. Labels refers to names. Territory refers to the principle-substance. Regarding "is this not exceedingly remote?": if one clings to existence or non-existence, one is very far from the Way. From "However, its" downward, it determines the treatise's intention according to the four teachings. Regarding "The text says" and so forth: "Opening the Tenet" states, "Extinction and salvation refers to great affliction being eternally extinguished and transcending the four currents." Not involving what is outside the realms means merely crossing the four currents of desire, existence, views, and ignorance within the realms. Not extinguishing the affliction of nirvāṇa means it merely takes the body of the aggregates to be the great affliction. From "Distinguishing differences" downward: since that treatise belongs to the Mahāyāna and yet is neither the separate nor the perfect [teaching], now, tracing the text of "Distinguishing Differences," one knows that it belongs to the shared teaching. "Distinguishing Differences" is the ninth chapter. Regarding "the unconditioned is one": it says, "Because they equally emerge from birth and death, they are identically termed the unconditioned." From "This is because" downward: it says, "The various paths of the three vehicles all have distinctions by reason of the unconditioned. This threefoldness is threefold in relation to the unconditioned; it is not that the unconditioned has three." From "The Tathāgata" downward: it says, "The Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā states: 'Does nirvāṇa have distinctions?' Answer: 'There are no distinctions. It is only that the Tathāgata has completely exhausted defilements and residual habituations, whereas the voice-hearers have not yet exhausted residual habituations.' I request to use a proximate metaphor to illustrate this remote purport: like a person cutting timber, removing a foot leaves no foot, and removing an inch leaves no inch; length and shortness lie in the feet and inches, not in the absence." The present master cites this, perhaps with some wording altered. Some editions have "voice-hearers have exhausted defilements but not residual habituations," which adds the character "exhausted" below "defilements." Regarding "lies in the feet and inches, not in the absence": feet and inches illustrates the shallowness or depth of the three vehicles; absence illustrates the oneness of the principle of nirvāṇa. From "Although both" downward: the other shore is nirvāṇa; the rising and falling is the three vehicles. By means of the ineffable path refers to the shared prajñā of the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā. Regarding "strikingly apparent" (xian, phonetic shi-xian): the Shangshu states, "Just now gathering and manifesting the artisans." Kong Anguo says, "Jiu means gathering; xian means manifesting." From "Now, the shared" downward, it criticizes Sengzhao's four faults, in the sequence of the text. Regarding "stooping to pull up the branches and twigs": Sengzhao says, "Looking upward to climb the mysterious root, stooping to pull up those lost in weakness." The first line is seeking above, and the second line is transforming below. Principle is the root of the Way, hence called the "mysterious root." An infant losing its hometown is called "lost in weakness." Skillful means and virtues being slight is called an "infant." Inherent suchness is called the "hometown." Now determining his intention, it therefore says "it is indeed" and so forth. Regarding "This obliterates sorrow and joy" and so forth: a person of the shared [teaching] thoroughly realizes that illusory transformations are identical with emptiness; therefore, sorrow, joy, and so forth are all completely obliterated. Equating light and darkness means that wisdom is light and delusion is darkness. Regarding "not engaging in the great or small": the commentary below explains, "This is an infant of the separate teaching, meaning that not committing the five heinous crimes is called not engaging in the great, and not giving rise to the mind of the two vehicles is called not engaging in the small. Here, making it an infant of the shared teaching does not let the letter harm the meaning: because of realizing identity with emptiness, greatness and smallness are eliminated. Metaphorizing it as an infant, following the intention of the chapter below, is merely harmonizing one's light to benefit beings, enabling sentient beings to see. The bodhisattva conforming to their initial learning is called 'infantile conduct'; this is manifesting conformity with humans and devas. All those prior to the stages of abiding in the three teachings as well as the perfect [teaching] are called infants. Now, evaluating the Zhaolun, it is merely an infant of the shared teaching." It is illustrated by the three animals crossing the river: because the three vehicles all realize nirvāṇa yet their wisdom has depth and shallowness—as the text is recorded in the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā and the twenty-first fascicle of the present sūtra—then the voice-hearer is like the hare, the pratyekabuddha is like the horse, and the bodhisattva is like the elephant. The metaphor of ash and severance is recorded in the Dazhidulun: "The voice-hearer severs the primary afflictions like burning wood into charcoal."