大般涅槃經疏 12.18

12.18

從「迦葉白佛」下，第二正答問，又兩：一問、二答。初問正是騰上作請。此有遠近，遠則騰初偈十二問，近騰品初之說。從「佛告」下，答，又二：初正答、後簡闡提。初正答又二：初因經致夢、次歎經。初因經致夢者，即是答四位菩薩，除前置後，但答中四。何者？其問菩提因，正答其問，略舉四耳。得聞涅槃，是名字菩薩。夢見羅剎，寤已發心，即觀行菩薩。不墮三惡，人天續發，即相似菩薩。是大菩薩，即是分真。明文在此（云云）。次歎經，可解。二從「善男子」去，舉十譬簡闡提。文為四：初一譬雙簡、次一譬別簡、三四譬重雙簡、四四譬重別簡。初譬除闡提取善根，故言雙簡。虛空譬法身，雲譬報身，雷雨譬應身說法。大地下田陂池，譬四位菩薩。枯木石山高原堆阜，喻於闡提不受佛教。次一譬唯簡闡提，是故云別。三四譬中，初譬可見。第二譬中言藥樹王和乳酪六物者，舊云依經作六行觀，若未譬長行散說。丸譬偈頌，塗創譬聞慧，熏譬思慧，塗目譬修慧，見譬讀，嗅譬誦，根譬法說，葉譬譬說，取身譬理味，取皮譬文言（云云）。開善但九譬，不取最後金剛譬。前第六金剛譬中云白羊角，《釋論》云山羊角（云云）。「迦葉白佛」下，是品中第二，但前答未發心是生善之義，次答三問是滅惡之義。生善滅惡是菩提要路、得佛近因。迦葉為後世開眼，故有斯問。就滅惡三問，即滅三障。初答云何於大眾而得無所畏，是滅業障。次答云何處濁世不污如蓮華，是滅報障。三答云何處煩惱煩惱不能染，是滅煩惱障。今舉三偈以答初問。前二偈明懺悔滅業障，後一偈明護法滅業障，即是改惡修功補過。通論懺悔凡有十意，謂逆順各十，如別記。懺護是其二也。懺中二：初偈舉非、次偈顯是。初約惡以明懺悔，先舉偈問、次釋偈為答，可見。二「迦葉復言」下，是約善以明懺悔，亦先舉偈問、次釋偈為答。凡三番釋偈：初番見所作即現在，生死際即過去，至無至處即未來，通懺三世業障。次番舉非。不見所作，謂一闡提。後從「若有菩薩所作善業」，即是舉是。二「作惡不即受」下，第三偈，是護法滅業。護法力大能滅業障，復感長壽不壞眷屬等。亦先舉偈、次釋。釋此偈有四意：初舉非、次明是、三重舉非、四歎經。初舉非中，河西云：天竺熱，停乳少時，自然成酪。文明惡即不受報，不如乳即成酪。而文不更安不字者，不須加之，以上不字而冠於下。次「譬如王使」下，明是正以護法滅業障，先譬、後合。王譬佛，使譬四依，善談論譬內智慧，巧於方便譬外能說法。實智居懷、巧說外化，如是之人能護法利他。奉命即傳佛旨，他國是入生死。寧喪身命不匿教者，身輕法重，死身弘法，合譬可見。三「善男子有一闡提」下，重舉非，更出前偈。四「是故當知」下，歎經。先歎滅惡，「如蓮華」下歎生善，皆可見。

From "Kāśyapa said to the Buddha" below is the second, the direct answer to the question, which also has two parts: first, the question; second, the answer. The initial question is precisely bringing forward what preceded to make a request. This has distant and near [references]: distantly, it brings forward the twelve questions of the opening verses; nearly, it brings forward the explanation at the beginning of the chapter. From "The Buddha told" onward is the answer, which also has two parts: first, the direct answer; afterwards, excluding the icchantika. First, the direct answer also has two parts: first, the dream induced by the sūtra; next, praising the sūtra. First, regarding the dream induced by the sūtra: this is precisely answering regarding the bodhisattvas of the four stages, setting aside the first and last, and only answering regarding the middle four. Why is this? As the question concerned the cause of bodhi, directly answering that question, it briefly cites these four. Attaining the hearing of nirvāṇa is the bodhisattva of names-and-words. Seeing a rākṣasa in a dream and generating the aspiration upon awakening is the bodhisattva of contemplative practice. Not falling into the three evil paths, but continuing to generate [it] among humans and gods, is the bodhisattva of resemblance. Being a great bodhisattva is [the bodhisattva of] partial reality. The clear text is here (and so forth). Next, praising the sūtra can be understood. Second, from "Good man" onward, it adduces ten analogies to exclude the icchantika. The text has four parts: first, one analogy of twofold exclusion; next, one analogy of specific exclusion; third, four analogies of renewed twofold exclusion; fourth, four analogies of renewed specific exclusion. The first analogy excludes the icchantika and takes those with roots of goodness, hence it is called twofold exclusion. Empty space is an analogy for the dharmakāya; clouds are an analogy for the saṃbhogakāya; thunder and rain are an analogy for the nirmāṇakāya expounding the Dharma. The low fields and ponds of the great earth are an analogy for the bodhisattvas of the four stages. Withered trees, rocky mountains, high plateaus, and mounds are an analogy for icchantikas who do not receive the Buddha's teaching. The next single analogy solely excludes the icchantika, and is therefore called specific. Among the third set of four analogies, the first analogy is evident. In the second analogy, where it speaks of blending six things including the king of medicinal trees with milk and curds: the old [commentary] says that relying on the sūtra one practices the contemplation of six practices, or if not yet analogised, it is the prose distributed teachings. The pill is an analogy for the verse gāthās; applying it to a wound is an analogy for wisdom from hearing; fumigating is an analogy for wisdom from thinking; applying it to the eyes is an analogy for wisdom from cultivation; seeing is an analogy for reading; smelling is an analogy for recitation; the root is an analogy for expounding through Dharma; the leaves are an analogy for expounding through analogies; taking the body is an analogy for the flavour of the principle; taking the bark is an analogy for the written words (and so forth). Kāishàn only has nine analogies, not taking the final analogy of the diamond. In the previous sixth analogy of the diamond, it says a white goat's horn, whereas the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa says a mountain goat's horn (and so forth). Below "Kāśyapa said to the Buddha" is the second part of the chapter; however, previously answering regarding those who have not generated the aspiration pertained to generating good, while next answering the three questions pertains to extinguishing evil. Generating good and extinguishing evil are the essential path to bodhi and the proximate causes for attaining buddhahood. Kāśyapa opened the eyes of later generations, hence he made these inquiries. With regard to the three questions on extinguishing evil, they are precisely the extinction of the three obstacles. First, answering "How in a great assembly does one attain fearlessness?" is extinguishing the obstacle of karma. Next, answering "How residing in a defiled world is one unstained, like a lotus?" is extinguishing the obstacle of retribution. Third, answering "How dwelling amid afflictions can afflictions not stain one?" is extinguishing the obstacle of afflictions. Now it adduces three verses to answer the first question. The first two verses clarify extinguishing the obstacle of karma through repentance; the latter one verse clarifies extinguishing the obstacle of karma through protecting the Dharma; that is, reforming evil, cultivating merit, and repairing faults. In general discussion, repentance has ten purports—that is, ten adverse and ten conforming, as noted elsewhere. Repentance and protection are two of them. Within repentance, there are two: the first verse adduces the improper, and the next verse reveals the proper. First, clarifying repentance in relation to evil, it first cites the verse to question, and next explains the verse as the answer, which is evident. Second, from "Kāśyapa further said" downward, it clarifies repentance in relation to good, likewise first citing the verse to question, and next explaining the verse as the answer. There are three rounds of explaining the verse: In the first round, seeing what has been done is the present, the limit of birth-and-death is the past, and reaching the place where nothing is reached is the future, generally repenting the karmic obstacles of the three periods of time. The next round adduces the improper: not seeing what has been done refers to the icchantika. Later, from "If there is a bodhisattva whose good karma is performed", it is adducing the proper. Second, from "Doing evil, one does not immediately receive [retribution]" downward, the third verse is protecting the Dharma to extinguish karma. The power of protecting the Dharma is great: it can extinguish the obstacle of karma, and further bring about longevity, an indestructible retinue, and so forth. It also first cites the verse and next explains it. In explaining this verse, there are four points: first, adducing the improper; next, clarifying the proper; third, re-adducing the improper; fourth, praising the sūtra. Within the first, adducing the improper, Héxī says: Central India is hot; if milk is left for a short while, it naturally becomes curds. The text clarifies that one does not immediately receive the retribution of evil, unlike milk immediately becoming curds. That the text does not further insert the negative character "not" [bù] is because there is no need to add it, as the negative character above already governs below. Next, from "Just as a king's envoy" downward, clarifying the proper precisely means extinguishing the obstacle of karma through protecting the Dharma; first is the analogy, afterwards the application. The king is an analogy for the Buddha; the envoy is an analogy for the four reliances; being skilled in debate is an analogy for internal wisdom; being skillful in expedient means is an analogy for externally being able to expound the Dharma. Harboring real wisdom within and carrying out skillful exposition externally—such a person is able to protect the Dharma and benefit others. Receiving the command is transmitting the Buddha's intent; another country is entering birth-and-death. Rather losing body and life than concealing the teaching means treating the body lightly and the Dharma heavily, dying with the body to propagate the Dharma; the application of the analogy is evident. Third, from "Good man, there is an icchantika" downward, it re-adduces the improper, reissuing the previous verse. Fourth, from "Therefore you should know" downward, it praises the sūtra. First, it praises the extinction of evil; from "like a lotus" downward, it praises the generation of good; both are evident.