大般涅槃經疏 11.27

11.27

從「迦葉白佛」下，品中第二，答能見難見性。文有四問答：初兩番辨深行證見、後兩番明淺行聞見。聞見酬其能見，證見酬其難見。於證見中總有二番：初番可見；次番中有問有答。答中總舉十譬。初以百盲通譬一切眾生。百是一數之圓，例如世姓甚多而言百姓。求解見性，譬如治目。造詣良醫者，根緣感佛。是時良醫，譬佛垂應。金錍四解。一云：譬此經一指，三指譬昔三乘教。亦云：金錍譬佛方便慧一指，三指譬根緣悟道，除膜譬斷無明煩惱。二云：三指譬三慧。三云：初教一指，般若至法華二指，涅槃三指。四云：譬三忍，信、順、無生。解三忍為二。一云：十信信忍，三十心順忍，十地無生忍。又初地至三地是信忍，四地至六地是順忍，七地至十地是無生忍。今明不然。經合佛性，豈可餘釋？一指示之，答云不見者，譬入真諦則不見性。二指不見者，譬空假二諦亦不見性。三指示之，答言少見，此譬一諦三諦即空假中名為佛性。初住初地則能分見，故言少耳。「善男子」下，合譬，又二：前正合、此況聲聞。初文者，若尋合文，金𰼺譬涅槃教，三指譬佛性，即是三德三諦等也。文云「無我惑亂」者，即是不了。昔教惑於無我，故不見性；今教真我，乃見佛性。次九譬，可尋也。「迦葉白佛」下，是第二，有兩番，明淺行聞見。初番問，可尋。佛答有四：一譬、二合、三勸、四褒貶。初譬中云非想非非想天者，三有四空之頂，無身而有識，無想而有想，此事難知。佛性亦爾，非二乘所了。二合等三文，可見。「迦葉白佛非聖凡夫」下，第二番問答。初問中云非聖凡夫者，即外道也。其自稱聖，如來奪之，故言非聖。若理內凡夫，即聖凡夫。內道外道俱云有我，有我之性兩事云何？佛舉貧富二人譬。有三：初譬、次合、三結成。譬為三：初菩薩施化、二聲聞施化、三如來施化。初菩薩化又為四：一說教、二稟受、三捨應、四起惑。共為親友者，能化所化化道交通，義言親友。王子富於法財，真我顯現，故言富眾生。取我在身，具足諸見，故言貧人。互相往反者，感應相關。「是時貧人」下，是第二眾生稟。受見王子刀者，非是證見，聞菩薩說真我佛性。好刀譬中道佛性真我。心中貪著者，愛樂此法。「王子後時」下，第三菩薩捨應。持真我去，故言持刀。機感事密，是故言逃。更化餘處，故言他國。「貧人於後」，是第四凡夫起惑。菩薩捨應，眾生流轉，受五陰身，故言寄宿。眠是闇時，譬無明昏。自號有我，故喻囈言。古本曰「讇」，言寱者，《典誥》囈字。「旁人聞」下，第二聲聞施化。應具論四果，文略，闕第三王。初王是初果。私謂：餘子之言，可兼二三。舊即旁人譬機，機將是人，是感初果，故言收之。興皇云：旁人是五方便似解，王是初果真解。似伏真斷破彼我見，言至王所。眾生對初果，義言君臣。屠割者，譬分析五眾求我叵得。曾稟此法，故言素為親厚。能化所化既非異轍，故言一處。眼見譬聞慧，手觸譬思慧，取譬修慧。並不得思修，故言不敢手觸，況當故取。羊角者，邪曲計我。欣笑譬悲慘。未欲破此邪計，故言隨意去。尋立餘子，即二果施化。次第四王即四果。「却後」下，是第三如來施化。但是前逃菩薩，今還成佛。數時者數耳。唯明無我不言真我者，望下文合中應有說我教也。優鉢羅華者，婆羅門計神白色。羊角者，剎利神色黃。火聚者，毘舍神赤。黑蛇者，首陀神黑。「善男子」合譬，還合三譬。譬云有一好刀，合云說我真相。譬云持是淨刀逃至他國，合云說已捨去。「聲聞緣覺」下，合前第二四果施化。「為斷如是」下，合第三。如來施化又二：先明無我之教，正是合前。「善男子」下，第二更明真我之教。前譬中無，但有其義。「善男子若有凡夫」下，第三結成答意，在文可見（云云）。

From "Kāśyapa said to the Buddha" onward is the second [section] within the chapter, answering [the question of] being able to see and the difficulty of seeing the nature. The text contains four question-and-answer exchanges: the first two distinguish profound practice of realization-seeing, and the subsequent two explain shallow practice of hearing-seeing. Hearing-seeing responds to "being able to see," and realization-seeing responds to "the difficulty of seeing." Within realization-seeing, there are two rounds in total: the first round can be seen [directly in the text]; in the next round, there are questions and answers. In the answer, ten metaphors are brought forward in all. First, one hundred blind people collectively represent all sentient beings. "One hundred" is the roundness of a single number, just as worldly surnames are very numerous yet one speaks of "the hundred surnames." Seeking to understand and see the nature is likened to treating the eyes. Going to a good physician represents the capacity and conditions stimulating [the response of] the Buddha. At that time, the good physician represents the Buddha manifesting in response. There are four explanations of the golden probe. One says: It is a metaphor for this sūtra being one finger, while the three fingers represent the past teachings of the three vehicles. It is also said: The golden probe represents the Buddha's expedient wisdom of one finger, the three fingers represent faculties and conditions awakening to the Way, and removing the film represents severing the afflictions of fundamental ignorance. The second says: The three fingers represent the three wisdoms. The third says: The initial teaching is one finger, from Prajñā up to the Lotus Sūtra is two fingers, and Nirvāṇa is three fingers. The fourth says: It is a metaphor for the three patiences—faith, conformity, and non-arising. Explaining the three patiences is divided into two. One says: The ten faiths are the patience of faith, the thirty minds are the patience of conformity, and the ten grounds are the patience of non-arising. Furthermore, the first through third grounds are the patience of faith, the fourth through sixth grounds are the patience of conformity, and the seventh through tenth grounds are the patience of non-arising. We now clarify that this is not so. Since the sūtra applies the metaphor to buddhadhātu, how could there be other explanations? Indicating with one finger and [the blind man] answering that he does not see is a metaphor for entering the real truth and thus not seeing the nature. Not seeing two fingers is a metaphor for the two truths of emptiness and the provisional also not seeing the nature. Indicating with three fingers and answering that he sees a little—this is a metaphor for the single truth and the three truths being identical to emptiness, the provisional, and the middle, which is named buddhadhātu. At the initial abode and the initial ground one is able to see partially, hence it says only "a little." From "Good man" onward is the application of the metaphor, again in two parts: the former directly applies the metaphor, and the latter compares it with the śrāvakas. As for the first text, if one examines the application text, the golden probe represents the teaching of Nirvāṇa, and the three fingers represent buddhadhātu, which is precisely the three virtues, the three truths, and so forth. The text stating "confused and disordered by non-self" means not having fully understood. The past teachings caused confusion regarding non-self, and therefore one did not see the nature; the present teaching of the true self allows one to finally see buddhadhātu. The next nine metaphors can be examined [in the sūtra]. From "Kāśyapa said to the Buddha" onward is the second, having two rounds, explaining the hearing-seeing of shallow practice. The question of the first round can be examined. The Buddha's answer has four parts: first, the metaphor; second, the application; third, the exhortation; fourth, praise and censure. The metaphor mentioning the heaven of neither-perception-nor-non-perception refers to the summit of the three existences and the four formless [attainments], where there is no body yet there is consciousness, no perception yet perception exists; this matter is difficult to comprehend. Buddhadhātu is likewise so: it is not something the two vehicles can fully understand. The three passages including the application can be seen [directly]. From "Kāśyapa said to the Buddha: Non-noble ordinary beings" onward is the second round of question and answer. The initial question mentioning "non-noble ordinary beings" refers to non-Buddhists. They call themselves noble, but the Tathāgata strips them of that, hence calling them non-noble. If they were ordinary beings within the principle, they would be noble ordinary beings. Both internal and external paths claim there is a self; what of these two matters regarding the nature of having a self? The Buddha brings forward the metaphor of the two men, one poor and one rich. It has three parts: first, the metaphor; next, the application; third, the conclusion. The metaphor has three parts: first, the bodhisattva's teaching and transforming; second, the śrāvaka's teaching and transforming; third, the Tathāgata's teaching and transforming. The initial bodhisattva's transformation again has four: first, expounding the teaching; second, receiving and accepting; third, relinquishing the response; fourth, giving rise to delusion. "Being close friends with each other" means that the transformer and the transformed have mutual intercourse on the path of transformation, which is figuratively termed "close friends." The prince is rich in Dharma-wealth and the true self is manifest, hence he is called a rich person. Grasping a self within the body and fully possessing various views, [the other] is called a poor person. "Going back and forth to each other" represents the mutual connection between stimulus and response. From "At that time the poor man" onward is the second, sentient beings receiving it. Seeing the prince's sword is not realization-seeing, but hearing the bodhisattva expound the true self of buddhadhātu. The fine sword represents the true self of the middle-way buddhadhātu. "Coveting it in his mind" means loving and delighting in this teaching. From "The prince at a later time" onward is the third, the bodhisattva relinquishing the response. Leaving while holding the true self is called holding the sword. The matters of capacity and stimulus are secret, and for this reason it says "fled." Going to transform another place is called "another country." "The poor man afterward" is the fourth, ordinary beings giving rise to delusion. When the bodhisattva relinquishes the response, sentient beings transmigrate and receive bodies of the five aggregates, hence it is called "lodging." Sleep is the time of darkness, representing the stupor of fundamental ignorance. Proclaiming of oneself that there is a self is likened to talking in one's sleep. An old edition says "flattery" (讇), but saying "sleep-talking" (寱) is the character *yì* (囈) from the ancient classics. From "Bystanders hearing this" onward is the second, the śrāvaka's teaching and transforming. The four fruits should be discussed in full, but the text is brief and lacks the third king. The first king is the first fruit. I personally remark: the words "remaining sons" can encompass the second and third. The old interpretation takes the bystanders as a metaphor for the capacity; the capacity brings this person and this stimulates the first fruit, hence it says "seized him." Xīnghuáng says: The bystanders are the resembling understanding of the five expedients, and the king is the true understanding of the first fruit. Resemblance subdues and truth severs, shattering that view of self, so it says "brought to the king's place." Sentient beings relative to the first fruit are figuratively termed ruler and minister. Butchering and slicing represents analyzing the five aggregates and finding no self obtainable. Having previously received this teaching, it is called "having long been on intimate terms." Since the transformer and the transformed do not take divergent paths, it says "in one place." Seeing with the eyes represents hearing-wisdom; touching with the hands represents thinking-wisdom; taking it represents cultivation-wisdom. Failing to attain thinking and cultivation, it says "did not dare touch it with hands, much less deliberately take it." The sheep's horn represents the crooked clinging to a self. Rejoicing and laughing represents grief and sadness. Not yet wishing to shatter this perverse clinging, it says "go as you please." Then setting up the remaining son is the second fruit's teaching and transforming. The next, the fourth king, is the fourth fruit. From "Afterward" onward is the third, the Tathāgata's teaching and transforming. This is simply the previously fled bodhisattva now returning and attaining buddhahood. "Several times" is merely a number. It only clarifies non-self and does not mention the true self, but looking to the application text below, there must be a teaching expounding the self. The *utpala* flower: Brahmins conceive the spiritual soul to be white. The sheep's horn: Kṣatriyas conceive the spiritual soul to be yellow. The mass of fire: Vaiśyas conceive the spiritual soul to be red. The black snake: Śūdras conceive the spiritual soul to be black. "Good man" applies the metaphor, again applying the three metaphors. The metaphor says there was a fine sword; the application says expounding the true characteristic of the self. The metaphor says holding this pure sword and fleeing to another country; the application says having expounded it, he departed. From "Śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas" onward applies the previous second, the four fruits' teaching and transforming. From "In order to sever such" onward applies the third. The Tathāgata's teaching and transforming is again twofold: first, clarifying the teaching of non-self, which directly applies to the preceding; from "Good man" onward, secondly, further clarifying the teaching of the true self. This was absent in the preceding metaphor, but the meaning is present. From "Good man, if there are ordinary beings" onward is the third, concluding the intent of the answer; it can be seen in the text, and so forth.