大般涅槃經疏 14.16

14.16

第五觀愛別離苦，從離緣生即是壞苦。若論壞苦，因中說果，即指樂受為體。今亦如是，即指恩愛是別離苦。文中明捨所愛身者，若命斷時為死苦者，己屬前世。今取離所愛身及所愛親屬并依報等，是愛別苦。《釋論》云「離他人易，離親屬難。離親屬易，離父母難。離父母易，離己身難。離己身易，離己心難。」頂生者是濕生，實論人在天邊，猶如乞兒在於王側，云何而言二王相似？然頂生是應，故得類天；若實報者，是則不及。天王壽長故眴疏，人王壽短故眴數。金輪至重，餘不能升，王以德力應重則輕。髦尾者，古人讀此為䰒尾。不然。短者單作毛，長者髟，下作類，如呼多技人為髦士，取其德長。劉孝標稱任昉為海內髦傑，即是此字。昔魏王珠照十二車，況頂生珠寧不照一由旬？此言大如車轂。又經云衣帶中者，在其德力，不在大小。寶女者，能生千子乃名寶女。《法顯傳》云「王妃生肉如瓜，有千㼑，一㼑一子者是。」《釋論》云「劬嬪是寶女，不孕。」二文既異，如何會通？此各為時所重（云云）。

Fifth, contemplating the suffering of separation from what is loved: arising from the conditions of separation, this is the suffering of change (vipariṇāma-duḥkhatā). When discussing the suffering of change, speaking of the cause in terms of the result, one points to pleasant feeling as its essence. Here it is also like this: one directly points to affectionate love as the suffering of separation. In the text, when it explains 'relinquishing the body that one loves,' if [taken as] when life is severed being the suffering of death, that would already belong to a former life. Here, taking the separation from the body one loves, the relatives one loves, and one's supporting environment (yibao) and so forth—this is the suffering of separation from the loved. The *Upadeśa* (*Dàzhìdù lùn*) says: 'It is easy to part from others, but difficult to part from relatives. It is easy to part from relatives, but difficult to part from parents. It is easy to part from parents, but difficult to part from one's own body. It is easy to part from one's own body, but difficult to part from one's own mind.' Mūrdhata (Crown-Born) was moisture-born; speaking truly, a human next to a deva is like a beggar beside a king—why then say that the two kings were alike? However, because Mūrdhata was an apparition (nirmāṇa), he was able to resemble the deva; if considered according to real karmic recompense, he would not have measured up. Because the heavenly king has a long lifespan, his blinking is infrequent; because the human king has a short lifespan, his blinking is frequent. The golden wheel is exceedingly heavy, and others cannot lift it; by the power of the king's virtue, where it should be heavy, it becomes light. As for 'yak-tail whisk' (máowěi), ancient people read this as *mángwěi* (䰒尾). That is not so. The short is written simply with 'hair' (máo 毛); the long with the radical biāo 髟 above and lèi 類 below, just as a person of many skills is called a 'distinguished gentleman' (máoshì 髦士), taking it in the sense of eminent virtue. When Liú Xiàobiāo called Rèn Fǎng 'the preeminent hero (máojié) within the seas,' it was this character. Formerly, the Pearl of the King of Wèi illuminated twelve carriages; how much more would Mūrdhata's pearl not illuminate a yojana? Here it says it was as large as the hub of a chariot wheel. Furthermore, the sūtra speaks of it being 'in his belt'; this lies in the power of its virtue, not its size. As for 'treasure woman,' only one who can bear a thousand sons is called a treasure woman. The *Fǎxiǎn zhuàn* says: 'The queen consort gave birth to a mass of flesh like a melon, having a thousand segments, with each segment containing one son; this was it.' The *Upadeśa* says: 'Gopā was a treasure woman, but was infertile.' Since the two texts differ, how are they to be harmonized? Each was what was valued at that time (and so forth).