大般涅槃經疏 11.21

11.21

從「迦葉汝今當」去，第二辨一體三寶。然昔初教舉非顯是、破邪歸正，明別體三寶，此義易知。前〈長壽〉中明護法，舉法歸依，諸佛已成一體三寶，不許歸別，歸別體者歸戒不具。今文勸歸己身當成一體三寶，顯於自體成善業故，又免魔縛。各有所據。就文為三：一勸、二論義、三領解。初文中云善分別者，勸令分別己身之中一體三寶。先勸、次釋。初如文。次若能諦觀者，釋勸也。得入祕藏者，即生理善甘露之義。是人已出世者，即是破惡毒藥之義。二俱有得，即此明文。又知我者是佛寶，我所者是法僧，二寶雖無異體義說為三。又佛覺、法不覺、僧和合，於一佛性說此三義。二「爾時迦葉」下，論義。有二番問答。初併不受、後併歸依，佛皆不許。初問有十偈，為四：前一行半唱不知、次兩行問昔別體、三四行半問今一體、四兩行結問請答。就初，總，云不知。次無上者，別，不知歸佛。無畏者，不知歸僧。云何作無我者，不知歸法。次云何歸佛者，兩偈問昔別體，為三：此半偈問佛寶。得安慰者，如前四相中說。次一行問法。三半行問僧。轉得無上利者，如前波闍波提供僧得佛法功德。僧是傳法之人，故言轉得無上利。三「云何真實說」下四行半，問今一體中又四：初一行半法說。「未來若不成」去，己身中隱三寶，未來當成可得歸依。若其不成，為可依不？不如次第依於別體。無預知者，無預約自照，次第約從他。次「云何未懷妊」一行三句，是譬說懷子。譬解懷子必十月，十月譬十地。若有解者，十地若滿，可得成佛；若無解者，徒自萬月，亦不成佛。三「眾生業亦然」一句，合譬。四「如佛之所說」下一行，難佛不定說，或令歸現或令歸當，致令愚者輪迴墮苦。四「假名」下二行，結問請答。初一行明我不知結請，次一行明佛知故請答。二「迦葉汝當知」下，佛答，還酬四問，從後為次。初一行許斷疑，酬其請答，如文。次一偈酬問一體。前舉懷妊，據了因作問。佛以中道正因為答，明諸菩薩與佛不異，那得云無十地包胎不可歸依？於諸菩薩者，舊有三釋：一是及字即是汝及諸菩薩等，於第七佛偈文迮，不安及字；二改於為及；三不須改，明諸菩薩皆同是佛。賢劫則第四，若七佛數即第七佛。佛是覺義，能覺佛性，與佛義同（云云）。三兩行酬其別體之問。翻邪入正，故須歸依。邪者天神為佛寶。殺法呪羊，云是婆藪殺汝而得生天，即是法寶。能殺之人，即是僧寶。翻此三邪，歸於三正。問：昔以正三翻於邪三，何不以正我翻於邪我？若以無我翻邪我者，何不以無三寶翻邪三寶？答：對治之法略有二種，一用有門為對治者，立正破邪；二用空門為對治者，故用無我破於邪我，各有便宜。三寶是境，歸馮有在，宜用有門。邪我是內患，宜以無虛之（云云）。四「如是」下半偈，酬前唱不知。今言能知，得無所畏，不應不知。「迦葉白佛」下，第二問答。初問中意者，併欲歸依。三種三寶皆是佛說，何所取捨？初一行欲依昔別體，別既翻邪即是正路；次兩行欲依自隱時一體；後一行欲依他顯時一體。既出生死已成正覺，故言諸有所無有。又解諸有，有現成佛。無有，無二十五有。二「爾時佛告」下，佛答。佛欲更為分別，不得妄依。文為三：初昔之別體有依不依、二顯時一體有依不依、三隱時一體正是所勸一向須依。初依不依者，為二：先明今不須依、次明昔則須依。初又二：初別體既是昔時為緣，今不須依；昔依時翻邪，昔日須依。次「所以者何」去，更釋不依之意。於佛性中有法僧二寶者，非但已成之佛，佛性之中具有法僧。只當成佛，亦具二性，即佛、法。法佛不二，即是僧寶。身既具三，何須依於別體三寶？次須依，又二：初「為欲化度」下，明昔則須依。次「若欲隨順」下，更釋須依之意。興皇明四假，理緣、就緣、對緣、因緣。昔即是對邪明正，是故須依。若依龍樹四悉，即對治意（云云）。次從「菩薩應作」下，明顯時一體，又二：有依、不依。不依文為二：初明不依。文云我今此身歸依佛者，即是自歸己身佛寶，豈敬他佛。次「何以故」下，更釋不依之意。然我與他佛既無異，何須歸他。次「若欲尊重」去，明有依義。為相尊重，是故須依。又二：先正明、後解釋。初正明者，法身是本地，舍利是應身。欲令眾生敬我意者，為欲亦化眾生生善。三從「亦令眾生」去，明今之所勸，隱時一體一向須依。文有三：法、譬、合。初法中為五：一分別一體。有三：此初文，則自身有佛寶也。「一切眾生皆依」下，即是自身有於法寶。「又有歸依非真」下，即自身僧寶。問：身有法僧，可爾；何為有佛？答：身中佛性，佛性即是法身佛寶，能說此法即是法寶，能受持者即是僧寶。他尚歸依我身三寶，我今豈可不自歸耶？問：會三乘歸一乘名一乘者，亦應會三寶歸一寶名為一寶。若會三乘歸一乘無三乘異，會三寶歸一寶亦無三寶之異。論師數師不敢為例，觀師例之。會三寶歸一寶，上義說佛法僧異，亦如會三乘為一乘，義說三乘異。故《法華》云「真是聲聞真阿羅漢（云云）。」從「若有分別」下，次為他作一體三寶。舉體是佛，佛是覺義。舉體是法，法是不覺。舉體是僧，覺與不覺而不相違。從「於生盲」下，三結別體。為生盲凡夫作此分別。「復當為諸」下，四結一體。為二乘得聖之人說我身有一體三寶。「如是菩薩」下五雙，結兩義。為惡眾生而作佛事，則結自身說於別體。為諸智者而作佛事，亦結自身說於一體。次譬說，為三：一大將、二太子、三大臣。所以舉三譬者，大將譬了因、太子譬正因、大臣譬緣因。亦譬三寶，太子譬法寶、大將譬佛寶、大臣譬僧寶。大將建意三：一臨陣制敵、二我最第一、三諸兵依我。諸兵依我譬緣，制勝譬了，第一譬正。太子亦爾，紹繼霸業譬正、調伏王子譬了、餘王子依譬緣。如王如先王，成前譬。王子大臣者，王子即屬大臣譬也。三菩薩亦爾。合譬中二：先正合、後結勸。初合者，所言三事與一體者，別說於三即是一體，一體之上義說於三。如涅槃中具有三點，實非別異。次「如來」下，結勸，又二：先勸捨昔別體之三、次勸取今一體之三。初捨中又二：先出昔三寶、後乃勸捨。昔別體中，舉頭譬佛寶，頭最為上。支節手足譬法僧，為化眾生示此梯隥。次「是故汝今」下，勸捨。次「汝於大乘」下，結勸。取自身中一體，如大將大臣於自身中建決定意，不取別體及他已成。

From "Kāśyapa, you should now" onward is the second [section], distinguishing the single-essence Three Jewels. Now, in the past, the initial teaching pointed out the false to reveal the true, and shattered heresy to take refuge in orthodoxy, explaining the distinct-essence Three Jewels; this meaning is easy to understand. Earlier, in the "Longevity" [chapter], when explaining the protection of the Dharma, it adduced taking refuge in the Dharma, [explaining that] all buddhas have already accomplished the single-essence Three Jewels and not permitting taking refuge in distinct [essences], for one who takes refuge in distinct essences does not possess the refuge precepts completely. The present text exhorts taking refuge in the single-essence Three Jewels that are to be accomplished in one's own person, because revealing one's own essence accomplishes wholesome karma, and also avoids the bonds of Māra. Each has its basis.
Regarding the text, there are three [parts]: first, exhortation; second, debate; third, receiving with understanding.
In the first text, "well distinguish" exhorts making distinctions regarding the single-essence Three Jewels within one's own person. First is the exhortation, then the explanation. The first is as in the text. Next, "if one can contemplate attentively" explains the exhortation. "Able to enter the secret treasury" is the sense of the nectar that gives rise to wholesome [roots in accord with] principle. "This person has already transcended the world" is the sense of the poison that shatters evil. That both have attainment is clear from this text. Furthermore, knowing "self" is the Buddha jewel; "belonging to self" (my possessions) is the Dharma and Saṅgha [jewels]. Although the two jewels do not have distinct essences, in sense they are spoken of as three. Furthermore, Buddha is awakening, Dharma is non-awakening, and Saṅgha is harmony; in the one buddhadhātu, these three senses are spoken of.
Second, from "At that time Kāśyapa" onward is the debate. There are two rounds of questions and answers. In the first, he rejects both; in the second, he takes refuge in both; the Buddha does not permit either.
The first question has ten verses, comprising four [parts]: first, one and a half verses expressing ignorance; next, two verses asking about the past distinct essence; third, four and a half verses asking about the present single essence; fourth, two verses concluding the question and requesting an answer.
Regarding the first, "overall," he says he does not know. Next, "unexcelled" is distinct: he does not know how to take refuge in the Buddha. "Fearless" means not knowing how to take refuge in the Saṅgha. "How to act without self?" means not knowing how to take refuge in the Dharma.
Next, "How to take refuge in the Buddha?" is two verses asking about the past distinct essence, comprising three [points]: this half-verse asks about the Buddha jewel. "Obtaining consolation" is as explained previously under the four marks. Next, one verse asks about the Dharma. Third, half a verse asks about the Saṅgha. "Turning to obtain unexcelled benefit" is like Prajāpatī's earlier offering to the Saṅgha obtaining the merit of the Buddha's Dharma. The Saṅgha consists of the persons who transmit the Dharma; hence it says "turning to obtain unexcelled benefit."
Third, from "How does one speak truly?" onward, the four and a half verses asking about the present single essence also have four [points]: first, one and a half verses give the doctrinal explanation. From "If in the future it is not accomplished" onward: the Three Jewels are concealed within one's own person; if they are to be accomplished in the future, one can take refuge in them. If they are not accomplished, can they be relied upon or not? Is it not better to rely sequentially upon distinct essences? "Without prior knowledge": "without prior" relates to self-illumination; "sequentially" relates to following another.
Next, "How, not yet pregnant...", one verse and three lines, is a metaphorical explanation of conceiving a child. The metaphor explains that carrying a child definitely takes ten months; ten months illustrates the ten stages (bhūmi). If one has understanding, when the ten stages are completed, one can attain buddhahood. If one lacks understanding, even in ten thousand months in vain, one will also not attain buddhahood.
Third, "Sentient beings' karma is also like this," one line, applies the metaphor.
Fourth, the one verse after "As the Buddha has spoken" challenges the Buddha's non-definitive teaching, sometimes directing them to take refuge in the present, sometimes directing them to take refuge in the future, which causes foolish people to transmigrate and fall into suffering.
Fourth, the two verses after "Nominal designation" conclude the question and request an answer. The first verse explains my ignorance to conclude the request; the next verse explains that because the Buddha knows, he requests an answer.
Second, from "Kāśyapa, you should know" onward, the Buddha answers, responding in turn to the four questions in reverse order. First, one verse promises to sever doubts, responding to his request for an answer, as in the text.
Next, one verse responds to the question on the single essence. Earlier he raised pregnancy, basing his question on the revealing cause (vyañjaka-hetu). The Buddha answers with the middle-way direct cause (janaka-hetu), explaining that all bodhisattvas are not different from the Buddha; how could one say that without the womb of the ten stages one cannot take refuge? Regarding "to the bodhisattvas," formerly there were three interpretations: first, that the character *yú* (to/in) is the character *jí* (and), meaning "you and all bodhisattvas"; in the verse on the seventh buddha the text is cramped, so the character *jí* was not placed; second, changing *yú* to *jí*; third, that no change is needed, explaining that all bodhisattvas are alike the Buddha. In the Bhadrakalpa it is the fourth; if counting the seven buddhas, it is the seventh buddha. "Buddha" has the meaning of awakening: being able to awaken to the buddhadhātu is the same in meaning as Buddha, etc.
Third, two verses respond to his question about the distinct essence. Turning away from heresy to enter orthodoxy, one must therefore take refuge. The heretical is taking devas as the Buddha jewel. The killing dharma of reciting mantras over sheep, saying "It is Vasu who kills you, and you will be born in heaven," is the Dharma jewel. The person capable of killing is the Saṅgha jewel. Turning away from these three heretical [refuges], one takes refuge in the three orthodox ones. Question: In the past one used the orthodox three to overturn the heretical three; why did one not use the orthodox self to overturn the heretical self? If one used selflessness to overturn the heretical self, why did one not use the absence of the Three Jewels to overturn the heretical three jewels? Answer: Methods of counter-remedy (pratipakṣa) are broadly of two kinds: first, using the gate of existence as the remedy, establishing the orthodox to shatter the heretical; second, using the gate of emptiness as the remedy; hence one uses selflessness to shatter the heretical self, each having its appropriate application. The Three Jewels are the objective sphere; taking refuge has a basis, so it is fitting to use the gate of existence. The heretical self is an internal affliction, so it is fitting to empty it with non-existence, etc.
Fourth, the half-verse below "Thus" responds to the earlier declaration of ignorance. Now he says being able to know brings fearlessness; one ought not to be ignorant.
From "Kāśyapa addressed the Buddha" onward is the second question and answer. The intent in the first question is that he wishes to take refuge in both together. All three kinds of Three Jewels were spoken by the Buddha; which should be adopted and which rejected? The first verse wishes to rely on the past distinct essence: since the distinct turned away from heresy, it is the orthodox path. The next two verses wish to rely on the single essence when concealed in oneself. The final verse wishes to rely on the single essence when manifested in others: since having transcended birth and death they have already accomplished correct awakening, it therefore says "all existences are non-existent." Another interpretation: "all existences" means the present accomplishment of buddhahood; "non-existent" means being free from the twenty-five realms of existence.
Second, from "At that time the Buddha told" onward, the Buddha answers. The Buddha wishes to make further distinctions for him, [showing that] one must not rely on them indiscriminately. The text has three parts: first, the past distinct essence has [aspects to] rely on and not rely on; second, the manifested single essence has [aspects to] rely on and not rely on; third, the concealed single essence is precisely what is exhortingly urged, to be relied upon exclusively.
Regarding the first, to rely on or not rely on, there are two: first, explaining that at present one need not rely [on it]; next, explaining that in the past one had to rely [on it]. The first also has two: first, since the distinct essence was a provisional expedient for conditions in the past, at present one need not rely [on it]; when relied upon in the past, it turned away from heresy, so in the past it had to be relied upon. Next, from "Why is this?" onward, he further explains the intent of not relying on it. In the buddhadhātu there are the Dharma and Saṅgha jewels: not only does an already-accomplished Buddha possess the Dharma and Saṅgha within the buddhadhātu, even a buddha-to-be also possesses both natures, namely Buddha and Dharma. The non-duality of Dharma and Buddha is precisely the Saṅgha jewel. Since the person already possesses the three, why must one rely on the distinct-essence Three Jewels?
Next, having to rely has also two: first, from "For the purpose of transforming and saving" onward, he explains that in the past one had to rely on it. Next, from "If one wishes to accord with" onward, he further explains the intent of having to rely on it. Xīnghuáng explains the four designations: principle-condition, according-with-condition, counter-condition, and causal condition. In the past it was countering the heretical to illumine the orthodox, which is why one had to rely on it. If based on Nāgārjuna's four siddhāntas, it is the intent of the counter-remedy (pratipakṣa-siddhānta), etc.
Next, from "A bodhisattva should make" onward, he clarifies the manifested single essence, which also has two: to rely on and not to rely on. The text on not relying has two: first, clarifying non-reliance. The text says, "My present body takes refuge in the Buddha," which means taking refuge in the Buddha jewel of one's own person; how could one revere another buddha? Next, from "For what reason?" onward, he further explains the intent of non-reliance: since there is no difference between me and other buddhas, why must I take refuge in another? Next, from "If one wishes to respect" onward, he clarifies the meaning of having reliance. For the purpose of mutual respect, one therefore must rely. Again there are two: first, directly clarifying; later, explaining. In the direct clarification: the Dharmakāya is the fundamental ground; the relics are the response body. The intention of "wishing to make sentient beings revere me" is because he also wishes to transform sentient beings so they give rise to goodness.
Third, from "Also causing sentient beings" onward, he clarifies that what is urged at present, the concealed single essence, must be relied upon exclusively. The text has three parts: doctrine, metaphor, and application.
In the first, the doctrine, there are five [points]:
1. Distinguishing the single essence. There are three: this initial text means one's own person possesses the Buddha jewel. From "All sentient beings rely on" onward means one's own person possesses the Dharma jewel. From "Furthermore, taking refuge is not true" onward means one's own person possesses the Saṅgha jewel. Question: It may be granted that the body possesses Dharma and Saṅgha; why does it possess Buddha? Answer: The buddhadhātu within the body—the buddhadhātu is precisely the Dharmakāya Buddha jewel; being able to teach this Dharma is the Dharma jewel; being able to receive and uphold it is the Saṅgha jewel. If others even take refuge in the Three Jewels of my body, how could I myself not take refuge in them? Question: If converging the three vehicles into the one vehicle is called the one vehicle, one should also converge the Three Jewels into the one jewel and call it the one jewel. If converging the three vehicles into the one vehicle leaves no difference among the three vehicles, converging the Three Jewels into the one jewel should also leave no difference among the Three Jewels. The treatise masters and Abhidharma masters did not dare make this an analogy; the contemplation masters analogized it. Converging the Three Jewels into the one jewel, in meaning above, speaks of the difference of Buddha, Dharma, and Saṅgha, just as converging the three vehicles into the one vehicle conceptually speaks of the difference of the three vehicles. Therefore the Lotus Sūtra says: "Truly a śrāvaka, truly an arhat," etc.
From "If there is distinction" onward is secondly making for others the single-essence Three Jewels. Taking the essence as a whole, it is Buddha, "Buddha" having the sense of awakening. Taking the essence as a whole, it is Dharma, "Dharma" having the sense of non-awakening. Taking the essence as a whole, it is Saṅgha, awakening and non-awakening not contradicting each other.
From "For the born-blind" onward, thirdly, concludes the distinct essence. For born-blind ordinary persons, he makes this distinction.
From "Furthermore, one should for all..." onward, fourthly, concludes the single essence. For the persons of the two vehicles who have attained sagehood, he explains that my person possesses the single-essence Three Jewels.
From "Such a bodhisattva" onward, fifthly, pairs and concludes the two meanings. Performing buddha-work for evil sentient beings concludes one's own person teaching the distinct essence. Performing buddha-work for the wise concludes one's own person teaching the single essence.
Next, the metaphorical explanation has three: first, the great general; second, the prince; third, the chief minister. Why are three metaphors raised? The great general illustrates the revealing cause; the prince illustrates the direct cause; the chief minister illustrates the conditioning cause. They also illustrate the Three Jewels: the prince illustrates the Dharma jewel; the great general illustrates the Buddha jewel; the chief minister illustrates the Saṅgha jewel. The great general establishes three intentions: first, facing the battlefield to vanquish the enemy; second, I am the foremost; third, all soldiers rely on me. All soldiers relying on me illustrates the conditioning [cause]; winning victory illustrates the revealing [cause]; being foremost illustrates the direct [cause]. The prince is also like this: inheriting the royal lineage illustrates the direct [cause]; subduing the other princes illustrates the revealing [cause]; the other princes relying [on him] illustrates the conditioning [cause]. "Like the king, like the former king" completes the previous metaphor. Regarding "the prince and the chief minister," the prince belongs to the minister metaphor. Third, the bodhisattva is also like this.
In the application of the metaphor, there are two: first, direct application; second, concluding exhortation. In the direct application: what is meant by the three things and the single essence is that distinctly speaking of the three is precisely the single essence, and upon the single essence one conceptually speaks of three. Just as within nirvāṇa there are the three dots, yet truly they are not distinct.
Next, from "The Tathāgata..." onward is the concluding exhortation, which also has two: first, exhorting the relinquishment of the past distinct-essence three; next, exhorting the adoption of the present single-essence three.
In the first, relinquishing, there are also two: first, identifying the past Three Jewels; thereafter, exhorting relinquishment. In the past distinct essence, raising the head illustrates the Buddha jewel, the head being supreme. The limbs, hands, and feet illustrate the Dharma and Saṅgha, showing these steps to transform sentient beings. Next, from "Therefore you now" onward exhorts relinquishment.
Next, from "You in the Great Vehicle" onward concludes the exhortation: adopting the single essence within one's own person, just as the great general and the chief minister establish a resolute intent within their own person, not adopting the distinct essence or what has already been accomplished by others.