大般涅槃經疏 1.14

1.14

七、出異解者。梁武中前中後，約時分經，若以平旦中後可然，黃昏夜半復齊何文？《居士請僧經》云「說此歷一周」，為是何年中前中後？今隨法分章則無此難。開善為序、正，序即召請，正即四章。光宅足流通，只是用章少分。靈味取問有緣起、答有餘勢。既處處有問答，應處處有餘勢。若河西，以初兩卷為引接今昔有緣門，此得實失權；今言召請，具包權實。以第三卷至大眾問為略廣門，此但約文言多少；今開為演涅槃施，則兼於廣略。以五行為涅槃行門，十功德為菩薩功德門。行與功德俱是因中，今合為行章則不煩文。以師子吼盡經為不可思議中道佛性門，混和難解；今分義用，文則易明。地師以第一卷為神通反示分，此得權失實；今言召請即無所偏。彼以第二卷為種性破疑除執分，第三卷至大眾問為正法實義分；今為一涅槃施，則兼其二分。彼以五行十功德為方便修成分，彼以師子吼為不放逸入證分，前之修成已是入證，證又入證可非煩重？今為義章。彼以迦葉為慈悲住持分，陳如為顯相分；持惡向善顯邪還正，合為用章。興皇初為引接今昔有緣門，此用朗意；二破疑除執門，此用地人意；三略廣門、四行門、五位門、六行中道門，皆用朗意；方便用門、邪正不二門，與河西開合之殊名味不異。

Seventh, pointing out differing explanations: Emperor Wu of the Liang divided the sūtra chronologically into the beginning, middle, and end. If this is based on dawn, midday, and afternoon, that might work; but with dusk and midnight, to what texts would they correspond? The Sūtra on the Upāsaka Inviting the Saṅgha says, 'Speaking this took a full week'; so to which year would the beginning, middle, and end belong? Now, dividing the chapters according to the Dharma avoids this difficulty. Kaishan posits the preface and the main body: the preface is the convocation, and the main body comprises the four chapters. Guangzhai adds the dissemination section, which is merely a small part of the chapter on function. Lingwei takes it that the questions have karmic origins and the answers have lingering momentum; yet since there are questions and answers everywhere, there should be lingering momentum everywhere. As for the Hexi [master, Dharmakṣema], taking the first two fascicles as the gateway of guiding and receiving those with karmic affinity from present and past captures the real but loses the provisional; now, our term 'convocation' fully encompasses both provisional and real. Taking from the third fascicle up to the great assembly's questioning as the brief and extensive gateway is merely based on the quantity of text; now, unfolding it as expounding the giving of nirvāṇa encompasses both the extensive and the brief. Taking the five practices as the gateway of nirvāṇa practice, and the ten virtues as the gateway of bodhisattva virtues—practice and virtues both belong to the causal stage; now, combining them into the chapter on practice avoids superfluous phrasing. Taking from Siṃhanāda to the end of the sūtra as the gateway of the inconceivable middle-way buddhadhātu conflates and blends them, making it difficult to understand; now, dividing it into essence/meaning and function makes the text easy to comprehend. The Dilun masters take the first fascicle as the section of supernatural manifestation and instruction, which captures the provisional but loses the real; now, saying 'convocation' avoids any bias. They take the second fascicle as the section of gotra, destroying doubts and eliminating attachments, and from the third fascicle up to the great assembly's questioning as the section of the true meaning of the correct Dharma; now, making it a single giving of nirvāṇa encompasses both of their sections. They take the five practices and ten virtues as the section of cultivating attainment through skillful means. They take Siṃhanāda as the section of entering realization through non-negligence; but the previous cultivation of attainment was already entering realization—would entering realization again not be redundant? Now we make it the chapter on meaning. They take Kāśyapa as the section of maintaining through compassion, and Kauṇḍinya as the section of revealing characteristics; holding badness toward goodness and revealing heterodoxy to return to orthodoxy are combined into the chapter on function. The Xinghuang master at first took the gateway of guiding and receiving those with karmic affinity from present and past, which adopted the idea of [Seng]lang; second, the gateway of destroying doubts and eliminating attachments, which adopted the idea of the Dilun masters; third, the brief and extensive gateway, fourth, the practice gateway, fifth, the stages gateway, and sixth, the gateway of practicing the middle way, all of which adopted Lang's ideas; the gateway of the function of skillful means, and the gateway of non-duality between heterodoxy and orthodoxy, differ from Hexi only in opening and combining, with no difference in their terms or import.