大般涅槃經疏 16.9

16.9

「文殊白佛」下，第二明圓慧行。舊云：破迷四諦二諦一諦之著。又云：破前分別心，明畢竟盡淨無所住著。是義不然。前標章說次第五行，戒定兩行尚無破著，何獨慧耶？慧行被破，戒定自破，三行破者即破聖行，聖行破五行亦破，五行若破即無所修，無修即無證，無證則破十功德。此義不然。當知此文明圓慧行。文為四：一發起、二正說、三領解、四結章。初發起中，不稱四二但稱一實。何以知之？昔初教中析法四諦，摩訶衍中相即二諦，先已曾說非為希有，又非無上。今臨涅槃方復更轉一實真諦，是為希有，名為無上，故次第後發起圓慧。正說為二：一明不般示圓慧、二約不更示圓慧。不般又為三：一直示、二約不轉橫歷事示、三約如來虛空豎示。就直示又二：初止其云何、二示其真理。云何有二意：一寄文殊嗟於未達，故言云何；二難文殊為是未達，為發起故，故言云何。次示真理，如文。二「從善男子若計有我」去，明不轉橫歷諸事以示圓慧。明不轉者，凡歷七事，謂非果、非因、非轉、非生、非出、非作、非造，皆即事而理，悉是常住。三「從善男子轉法輪佛境界」去，是豎結圓慧無非常住。或云：如來約果理，佛性約因理，虛空通因果（云云）。從「善男子語有二種」下，是第二明不更，為二：先明異故不更、次明同故不更。初異故不更者，既其兩異，何得言更？異有八：一語異、二眾異、三根異、四德異、五利益異、六請主異、七所說異、八聲遍異。初轉法輪為五比丘：一陳如、二十力迦葉、三跋提、四頞鞞、五摩男拘利，今總言之。「復次凡有所說」下，二明同故不更。又三：法、譬、結。初法中明同故無更。「譬如」下，譬釋無更。凡三譬：初譬生善滅惡、二偏滅惡、三偏生善，此等義同，是故無更。「是故汝今」下，是第三結無更。

From "Mañjuśrī addressed the Buddha" below, secondly, explains the practice of round wisdom. The older [commentaries] say: It refutes attachments that are confused about the four truths, two truths, or one truth. They also say: It refutes the previous discriminating mind, clarifying that ultimately, complete purity has nothing to abide in or attach to. This meaning is not so. Earlier, setting forth the headings, it explained the sequential five practices; the two practices of morality and concentration do not yet involve refuting attachments, so why wisdom alone? If the practice of wisdom is refuted, morality and concentration will naturally be refuted; if the three practices are refuted, that immediately refutes holy conduct; if holy conduct is refuted, the five practices are also refuted; if the five practices are refuted, there is nothing to cultivate; if there is no cultivation, there is no realization; if there is no realization, then the ten virtues are refuted. This meaning is not so. One should know that this text explains the practice of round wisdom. The text has four parts: 1. launching; 2. direct explanation; 3. understanding; 4. concluding the section. In the first part, launching, it does not name four or two, but only names the one reality. How is this known? Formerly, in the initial teaching, it analyzed dharmas into the four truths, and in the Mahāyāna, it explained the mutual identity of the two truths; these had already been taught previously, so they are not rare, nor are they unsurpassable. Now, on the verge of nirvāṇa, it further turns the true truth of the one reality; this is rare and named unsurpassable, so following in sequence, it launches round wisdom. The direct explanation has two parts: 1. clarifying non-nirvāṇa to reveal round wisdom; 2. revealing round wisdom in terms of not again. Non-nirvāṇa also has three parts: 1. directly revealing; 2. revealing horizontally across affairs in terms of non-turning; 3. revealing vertically in terms of the Tathāgata and empty space. On directly revealing, there are also two parts: first, stopping his "how so?"; second, revealing its true principle. "How so?" has two meanings: first, lodging with Mañjuśrī's lamentation over those who have not yet understood, hence saying "how so?"; second, pressing Mañjuśrī as to whether he has not understood or is asking in order to launch it, hence saying "how so?" Next, revealing the true principle is as in the text. Second, from "Good sons, if one reckons there is a self" onwards, clarifies non-turning horizontally across various affairs to reveal round wisdom. Clarifying non-turning passes through seven affairs in all, namely: non-effect, non-cause, non-turning, non-arising, non-emergence, non-action, and non-creation; all are the principle right within affairs, and all are permanently abiding. Third, from "Good sons, turning the wheel of Dharma is the realm of the Buddha" onwards, is vertically concluding round wisdom as none other than permanently abiding. Or it is said: the Tathāgata is in terms of the principle of fruition; buddhadhātu is in terms of the principle of the cause; empty space connects cause and fruition (and so forth). From "Good sons, words are of two kinds" below, is secondly, clarifying "not again," having two parts: first, clarifying not again because of difference; next, clarifying not again because of sameness. First, as for not again because of difference: since the two are different, how could one say "again"? There are eight differences: 1. difference in speech; 2. difference in the assembly; 3. difference in faculties; 4. difference in virtues; 5. difference in benefit; 6. difference in the requester; 7. difference in what was taught; 8. difference in the pervasiveness of the sound. The first turning of the Dharma wheel was for the five bhikṣus: 1. Kauṇḍinya; 2. Daśabala-Kāśyapa; 3. Bhadrika; 4. Aśvajit; 5. Mahānāma-Kulika; here they are spoken of collectively. From "Furthermore, whatever is spoken" below, secondly, clarifies not again because of sameness. This further has three parts: dharma, parable, and conclusion. First, in the dharma, it clarifies no repetition because of sameness. From "For example" below, it explains no repetition through parables. There are three parables in all: first, the parable of producing good and eliminating evil; second, solely eliminating evil; third, solely producing good. These meanings are identical, and therefore there is no repetition. From "Therefore you now" below, is thirdly, concluding no repetition.