大般涅槃經疏 12.7

12.7

河西云：〈文字〉、〈鳥〉、〈月〉三品，同明真應。文字半滿只是鳥喻常無常。常無常只是月喻隱顯，因字識理達常無常能隱能顯。今更次之，如來常依二諦三諦說法，故知文字是佛教，即文字達三諦，具足一教一切教。欲顯圓滿修多羅，故題文字品。次鳥喻者，依教立行，即雙流行二行，並觀一行一切行。下文云「復有一行是如來行。」次文字之後明二鳥共行，故成次第。亦是依教生智，智望於教，教即成境，由境發智，由智立行，教轉成境，智轉成行，故為次第。此品答云何共聖行娑羅迦隣提。此還舉鳥以況於行以為答問。能喻是娑羅迦隣提，所喻是雙流共行。舊解不同，或言娑羅是雙，迦隣是鳥。然娑羅翻為堅固，何得言雙？或言娑羅是一隻，隣提是一隻。此乃兩類，不得是雙。或言娑羅一雙，迦隣提一雙，引下文云「鳥有二種，一名鴛鴦、二名隣提。」此乃兩類為兩雙。或言娑羅翻為鴛鴦，問中問娑羅，答中答鴛鴦，類異義同，乃以鴛鴦替於娑羅。或言隣提無翻，或翻為天鶴，引六卷云「雁鶴舍利」。然漢不善梵音，只增爭競，意在況喻取其雌雄共俱飛息不離，以況一中無量、無量中一，非一非無量而一而無量，呼為雙流，乃名共行。問：為凡與凡共行？聖與聖共行？凡與聖共行？他解云：觀生死無常，不識涅槃常。觀涅槃常，不識生死無常。二解不明，如但識金不識鍮、但識鍮不識金。若精識二物，乃是雙觀苦樂，我無我亦如是。聖如是行，凡亦如是，故言共行。此不應爾，與譬相違，譬明二鳥俱游。如汝所釋，一鳥窮下之生死、一鳥窮高之涅槃，升沈碩乖，雙游不顯。假令二鳥但雙游下不雙游高、游高不游下，雙游不成。又一家引半滿約一法，雙游約二法。若取生死無常、佛果是常共為滿者，兩物各異、梨柰體別，安得是滿？夫雙游者，觀生死中有常無常，觀佛果中亦常無常，取生死涅槃兩常為一雙滿，取生死涅槃兩無常為一雙半，即是兩法共起，乃曰雙游。今明義皆不爾。兩常俱起乃是二雄俱飛，兩無常起乃是二雌並飛，與譬相背，雙游不成。今言雙游者，生死具常無常，涅槃亦爾，在下在高雙飛雙息，即事而理、即理而事，二諦即中、中即二諦，非二中而二中，是則雙游義成，雌雄亦成。事理雙游其義既成，名字觀行乃至究竟雙游皆成，橫竪具足無有缺減。此中備有凡凡共行、凡聖共行、非凡非聖共行，約人法分別俱成。以是義故，故言鳥喻品。

Héxī says: The three chapters—〈Letters〉, 〈Birds〉, and 〈Moon〉—together clarify the true and the responsive. The half and full of letters are simply the bird parable's permanence and impermanence. Permanence and impermanence are simply the moon parable's concealment and manifestation; through letters one recognizes the principle, and penetrating permanence and impermanence one is capable of concealment and manifestation. Now we order them further: The Tathāgata constantly expounds the Dharma relying on the two truths and the three truths; therefore we know that letters are the Buddha's teaching. Through letters one penetrates the three truths, completely possessing the one teaching and all teachings. Wishing to reveal the complete and perfect sūtra, it is therefore titled the "Chapter on Letters". Next is the parable of the birds: relying on the teaching, one establishes practice; that is, the two practices flowing together, simultaneously contemplating one practice and all practices. The text below says: "There is further one practice, which is the Tathāgata's practice." Explaining the two birds traveling together after letters thus forms the sequence. It is also that relying on teaching gives rise to wisdom: wisdom looks toward the teaching, and the teaching becomes the object; through the object wisdom is aroused, and through wisdom practice is established. The teaching turns into the object, and wisdom turns into practice; hence it forms the sequence. This chapter answers: How does one practice together with the holy ones, like the sāra and kālindi birds? This again raises the birds to illustrate the practice as the answer to the question. The vehicle of the metaphor is the sāra and kālindi; the tenor of the metaphor is the two flowing and traveling together. Ancient interpretations differ. Some say sāra means "a pair" and kālin means "birds". However, sāra translates as "firm and solid"; how could it mean "a pair"? Some say sāra is one bird and lindika is one bird. These would then be two kinds, and cannot be a pair. Some say sāra is one pair and kālindi is one pair, citing the text below: "There are two kinds of birds: one is called mandarin duck, and the second is called lindika." These are then two kinds making two pairs. Some say sāra translates as mandarin duck: the question asks about sāra, and the answer replies with mandarin duck; the categories differ but the meaning is the same, so mandarin duck replaces sāra. Some say lindika has no translation, or that it translates as heavenly crane, citing the six-fascicle [version]: "geese, cranes, and śārikās". However, Chinese does not master Sanskrit sounds and only increases disputation. The intention in using the metaphor lies in taking the male and female flying and resting together without separating, in order to illustrate the immeasurable within the one and the one within the immeasurable—neither one nor immeasurable, yet one and immeasurable—which is called flowing together, and thus named traveling together. Question: Do ordinary persons travel together with ordinary persons? Do holy ones travel together with holy ones? Or do ordinary persons travel together with holy ones? Another explains: Contemplating the impermanence of saṃsāra, one does not recognize the permanence of nirvāṇa. Contemplating the permanence of nirvāṇa, one does not recognize the impermanence of saṃsāra. When the two understandings are not clear, it is like only recognizing gold without recognizing brass, or only recognizing brass without recognizing gold. If one thoroughly recognizes both things, this is the dual contemplation of suffering and bliss; self and non-self are also like this. The holy ones practice like this, and ordinary persons also do so; therefore it says "traveling together". This should not be so, as it contradicts the parable. The parable illustrates two birds roaming together. According to your explanation, one bird exhausts saṃsāra below, while one bird exhausts nirvāṇa high above; their rising and sinking are vastly contrary, and their roaming together is not made evident. Even if the two birds only roam together below and do not roam together above, or roam above and do not roam below, roaming together is not accomplished. Furthermore, one school cites the half and the full as pertaining to a single dharma, and roaming together as pertaining to two dharmas. If one takes the impermanence of saṃsāra and the permanence of the Buddha-fruit to together constitute the full, the two things are mutually distinct—like pears and apples having different substances—how could this be full? Roaming together means contemplating that within saṃsāra there are permanence and impermanence, and contemplating that within the Buddha-fruit there are also permanence and impermanence; taking the two permanences of saṃsāra and nirvāṇa as one pair of the full, and taking the two impermanences of saṃsāra and nirvāṇa as one pair of the half—this is the two dharmas arising together, and only then is it called roaming together. Now we clarify that the meaning is not like any of these. Two permanences arising together would be two males flying together; two impermanences arising together would be two females flying side by side. This contradicts the parable, and roaming together would not be accomplished. Now, when speaking of roaming together: saṃsāra possesses both permanence and impermanence, and nirvāṇa is also like this; flying together and resting together whether below or high above, phenomena are principle and principle is phenomena, the two truths are the middle and the middle is the two truths, neither two nor middle yet both two and middle—then the meaning of roaming together is accomplished, and the male and female are also accomplished. Once the meaning of the roaming together of phenomena and principle is accomplished, the roaming together of names and words, contemplative practice, and up to the ultimate are all accomplished, complete and lacking nothing both horizontally and vertically. Within this there is fully ordinary persons traveling together with ordinary persons, ordinary persons and holy ones traveling together, and neither ordinary persons nor holy ones traveling together; distinguished in terms of persons and dharmas, all are accomplished. For this reason, it is called the "Chapter on the Parable of the Birds".