大般涅槃經疏 17.8

17.8

第二明四無量心者，亦名四等。無量從境，四等從心。何者？前境非一，故名無量。在境雖多，我心一相，故名為等。通而為言，境亦名等，心亦無量（云云）。文為二：初明四心、後明心果。初辨四心又二：先明次第四、後明圓四。次第又三：一略標、二論義、三領解。初標如文。次「迦葉」下，論義，先問、次答。問開五難：一難四心應三、二難四心應一、三重難四心應三、四難四心應二、五重難四心應一。合而言之亦成三難：第一與第三難四令三、第二與第五難四令一、第四一難難四令二。且依經文而分五難：第一以兩心無異同能治瞋，應同是一。喜能與樂捨能除癡，是故但三，不應有四。「慈有三緣」下，第二皆同有三，難令唯一，先唱三緣、次釋三心，三緣深淺，但為一義。然約境雖異，緣心無別，如緣貧窮即眾生緣，知此貧人應須衣食即是法緣，若知眾生須知如來受第一樂則無所須即是無緣。能緣既一，不應有四，故只是一緣。五陰名眾生緣者，五陰從何而生？緣所須物而施與之，是名法緣。若緣如來，不須此物，即是無緣。欲明緣境心遍，乃至上緣於佛，況復餘境。「慈之所緣」下，第三舉三緣難。眾生境淺，法空則深，無緣兩無是故極深。既有三緣，寧得有四？只應有三。成論人云：緣生是生空，緣法是法空，緣如來是平等空。此失文意。文云「緣眾生者，緣於父母妻子，願與其樂。」何時云空？「人有二種」下，第四難人有二種，見行利根、愛行鈍根，利人好瞋為教鈍者，十遍不解是故生瞋。為此義故，須修慈悲以捨瞋心。鈍見利者恒生嫉妬，所以令其修於喜捨，即除嫉妬。若爾，只見有二，不應有四。「夫無量者」下，第二以名字離合作難，既言無量，豈得唯四？既其但四，不應無量。若無量者，唯應是一。次如來答，為二：先破定四之執、次答無四之難。初有三：一明教門廣略不定、二明反常不定、三明治惑不定。既其不定、何必須四？初約十二因緣不定為答。或十一乃至二一因緣，隨機利益，不可為定。除生一法者，河西云：薩遮尼揵。聰明鍱腹、頭戴火冠來至佛所，其心高逸不聽佛法，密迹杵擬怖方聽法。其父是梵志、母是尼揵，俱共出家。以從非法父母生故，唯此為恥，餘無所憚。佛將護之，故除生一法，唯說十一。為迦葉說，以辟支根利復無忌諱，具說十二。「善男子如來方便」下，第二反常不定，或謂口密不定。佛實具足常樂我淨，亦說無常不淨。生死實是無常不淨，亦說常樂我淨。「善男子或有眾生」下，第三治惑不定，謂身密不定。作轉輪王施財是捨，與五欲樂是喜，作僕使趨走是慈，訶諫是悲。「善男子是無量」下，第二答無四之問。又二：前總、後別。總又二：初舉二事、次總非前問。舉二事者，前舉體異、次明用異。初體異者，得報不同，慈得遍淨，悲得空處，喜得識處，捨得不用處，處異故治惑不同。「如是無量伴類」下，第二明用異者，貪取人物，慈與人物；瞋與人苦，悲拔人苦；嫉忌人樂，喜與人樂；癡長憎愛，捨亡愛憎。「以是義故」下，二總結前非。非一者，非第二第五。非二者，非第四。非三者，非第一第三。「如汝所說」下，第二別答五問，即為五章。此初答第一治惑難，唯三無四。今明雖同治瞋，瞋有輕重，是故成四。有六復次，如文。「是故迦葉是無量」下，答第二同緣難。治惑不同伴類有四，何得令同？有三緣但共為一。「復以器」下，答第三淺深難，難令有三。今明隨用有四，豈逐行為三？或言器是境。「以行分別」下，答第四據人利鈍難。欲明雖有兩人，而有四行，不得為二。「以無量故」下，答第五名字難，為二：初列四章門、次廣解釋。欲明無量有四句，何妨得有四種無量。「迦葉白佛」下，第三領解，如文。「世尊頗有菩薩」下，第二明不次第即圓四心，又二：初料簡小慈、次顯大慈。此之大小，小亦不小，不可以凡夫為小、二乘為大，二乘為小、菩薩為大。何以故？凡夫二乘俱不住於大涅槃故。今以次第慈為小、不次第慈為大，此兩俱住大涅槃故。有人以似為小、真為大。此亦不然，次第似真俱小，不次第似真俱大。故簡小有兩問答。初問有菩薩住大涅槃，有慈悲心，非是大慈心不？此正問次第梵行。次佛答，為三：一唱有、二釋有、三結有。初倡如文。次釋有中二：先出境、次明觀。初境有九品，冤、親、中人各有三品，或謂中人唯一但七，中人於我無冤無親，不須開三，一往如此。然此中人不無愚智貴賤之殊，故可分三，便成九境，即有九慈。次「是菩薩」下，正明修觀。若全未修，但欲與其三親三樂、三冤三苦、三種中人不與苦樂。若初修慈，於三親中與三品樂，於三中人與三品樂，於三冤人上冤與下樂、中冤與中樂、下冤與上樂。第二修時，上冤與中樂、中下兩冤與其上樂。第三修時，三冤併與上樂，未是親中三種之樂。第四修時，即以中人下樂併與三冤。第五修時，以中人中樂併與三冤。第六修時，以中人上樂併與三冤。第七修時，以三親下樂併與三冤。第八修時，以三親中樂併與三冤。第九修時，以三親上樂併與三冤，是名上冤與增上樂，爾時得名慈心成就。又直取三品樂與九種境，初入觀時三親與三樂，第二時中親與上樂、下親與中樂，第三時下親與上樂，第四時下中人與下樂，第五時下中人與中樂，第六時下中人與上樂，第七時上冤與下樂，第八時上冤與中樂，第九時上冤與上樂，是名慈心成就。今文中但略，有四番入觀。初番三親等與上樂，此總三親以為一番，別開三冤以為三番。若明修觀，實有九品修習不同，而今文中但明三品。「善男子是名得慈」下，第三結有。「世尊何緣」下，是第二番，亦先問、次答。答為三：一倡難成、二釋、三結。初文倡。次「何以故」下，釋，先法、次譬。凡舉四譬，如文。惑彊慈弱不得名大，達惑慈成方名大慈。「以是義」下，第三結。「善男子菩薩住初地」下，是第二顯大，明圓四心方是大慈。文為二：一明大慈、二明虛實。初大慈又三：一正明大慈、二明兼用、三明善本。初正明大慈又三，謂倡、釋、結。初倡如文。次釋中意者，上來於上冤與上樂，未於闡提與其上樂。今此圓慈，緣於闡提，但見實相，不見其過故不生瞋，方是大慈。三結如文。

Second, explaining the four immeasurable minds: they are also called the four equalities. 'Immeasurable' is derived from the objective realm; 'four equalities' is derived from the mind. Why? The objective realm before one is not single; hence it is called 'immeasurable'. Although things are manifold in the objective realm, my mind has a single mark; hence it is called 'equal'. Speaking broadly, the objective realm is also called equal, and the mind is also immeasurable (and so on). The text has two parts: first, explaining the four minds; second, explaining the fruit of the minds. First, analyzing the four minds also has two parts: first, explaining the gradual four; second, explaining the circular four. The gradual [four] also has three parts: first, briefly stating the headings; second, debating the meaning; third, receiving and understanding. The initial statement of the headings is as in the text. Next, from 'Kāśyapa' onward, debating the meaning has first questions and next answers. The questions present five challenges: 1. challenging that the four minds should be three; 2. challenging that the four minds should be one; 3. repeatedly challenging that the four minds should be three; 4. challenging that the four minds should be two; 5. repeatedly challenging that the four minds should be one. Combined, they also form three challenges: the first and third challenge the four to be three; the second and fifth challenge the four to be one; and the fourth single challenge challenges the four to be two. Provisionally following the sūtra text, they are divided into five challenges. The first: because two minds are without difference in both being able to counter anger, they should be the same single [mind]. Joy can bestow happiness, and equanimity can eliminate ignorance; therefore there are only three, and there should not be four. From 'Friendliness has three objects' onward, the second: all equally have three, challenging [them] to be only one; first stating the three objects, next explaining the three minds. The depth and shallowness of the three objects serve only as a single meaning. Although differing in terms of the objective realm, the cognitive mind has no distinction: if taking poverty as the object, that is the sentient-being object; knowing that this poor person requires clothing and food is the phenomenon object; and if knowing that sentient beings need to know the Tathāgata's experiencing of the foremost bliss so that there is nothing required, that is the non-objective. Since that which cognizes is already one, there should not be four; hence it is just a single object. The five aggregates being called the sentient-being object: from where do the five aggregates arise? Taking the required things as objects and giving them away is called the phenomenon object. If taking the Tathāgata as the object, these things are not needed, which is the non-objective. This is intended to explain that the mind cognizing the objective realm is all-pervading, even up to taking the Buddha as the object, let alone other objective realms. From 'That which friendliness takes as an object' onward, the third adduces the three objects to challenge. The sentient-being realm is shallow; emptiness of phenomena is deep; and the non-objective lacks both, and is therefore extremely deep. Since there are three objects, how could there be four? There should only be three. The followers of the Chengshi lun say: taking sentient beings as an object is emptiness of sentient beings; taking phenomena as an object is emptiness of phenomena; taking the Tathāgata as an object is emptiness of equality. This misses the sūtra's meaning. The text states: 'Taking sentient beings as an object means taking parents, wives, and children as objects, wishing to give them happiness.' When does it ever speak of emptiness? From 'There are two kinds of people' onward, the fourth challenges that people are of two kinds: those of view-practice with sharp faculties, and those of craving-practice with dull faculties. Sharp people are prone to anger when teaching dull ones; when they do not understand after ten attempts, anger arises. For this reason, one must cultivate friendliness and compassion to relinquish the angry mind. When the dull see the sharp, they constantly produce jealousy; therefore they are made to cultivate joy and equanimity, which eliminates jealousy. If so, only two are seen; there should not be four. From 'Now, as for the immeasurable' onward, the second challenges using the separation and combination of names: since it says 'immeasurable', how could there only be four? Since there are only four, they should not be immeasurable. If they are immeasurable, there should only be one. Next, the Tathāgata's reply has two parts: first, refuting the clinging to a fixed four; next, answering the challenge that there are not four. The first has three parts: 1. explaining that the teaching approaches are unfixed in being broad or brief; 2. explaining that defying the ordinary is unfixed; 3. explaining that curing afflictions is unfixed. Since they are unfixed, why must there be four? The first answers in terms of the twelve links of dependent origination being unfixed: sometimes eleven down to two or one link, benefiting in accordance with capacity, which cannot be fixed. Regarding omitting the single factor of birth: Héxī states that Satyaka Nirgrantha, who was clever and wrapped his belly with iron plates and wore a crown of fire on his head, came to the Buddha's place. His mind was haughty and would not listen to the Buddha's Dharma, until Guhyapada raised his vajra-sceptre to terrify him, whereupon he finally listened to the Dharma. His father was a brāhmaṇa and his mother was a Nirgrantha, and both had gone forth together. Because he was born from illegitimate parents, he felt ashamed of this alone and was not intimidated by anything else. The Buddha accommodated him, and so omitted the single factor of birth, teaching only eleven. For Kāśyapa, because his pratyekabuddha faculties were sharp and moreover had no taboos, he taught all twelve. From 'Good son, the Tathāgata's skillful means' onward, the second is that defying the ordinary is unfixed, also termed the oral secret being unfixed: the Buddha is truly complete with permanence, bliss, self, and purity, yet he also teaches impermanence and impurity. Saṃsāra is truly impermanence and impurity, yet he also teaches permanence, bliss, self, and purity. From 'Good son, there are sentient beings' onward, the third is that curing afflictions is unfixed, termed the bodily secret being unfixed: acting as a wheel-turning king and giving wealth is equanimity; giving the pleasure of the five desires is joy; acting as a servant running errands is friendliness; and rebuking and admonishing is compassion. From 'Good son, these immeasurables' onward, the second answers the question of there not being four. This also has two parts: first general, then specific. The general also has two parts: first, adducing two matters; next, generally negating the previous questions. Adducing two matters: first, adducing difference in essence; next, explaining difference in function. First, difference in essence: obtaining different retributions—friendliness obtains the all-pervading purity, compassion obtains the station of infinite space, joy obtains the station of infinite consciousness, and equanimity obtains the station of nothingness; because the stations differ, their curing of afflictions differs. From 'Such immeasurable companions' onward, the second explains difference in function: greed seizes others' possessions, while friendliness gives others possessions; anger gives others suffering, while compassion eradicates others' suffering; jealousy begrudges others' happiness, while joy gives others happiness; ignorance increases hatred and craving, while equanimity eliminates craving and hatred. From 'For this reason' onward, the second generally concludes the previous errors: negating one negates the second and fifth; negating two negates the fourth; negating three negates the first and third. From 'As you have said' onward, the second specifically answers the five questions, forming five sections. This first answers the first challenge on curing afflictions, that there are only three and not four. Here it explains that although they equally counter anger, anger has lightness and heaviness, and so they form four. There are six successive points, as in the text. From 'Therefore, Kāśyapa, these immeasurables' onward, this answers the second challenge on sharing objects: curing afflictions differs and there are four companions, so how could they be made identical? There are three objects, but they only combine into one. From 'Furthermore, by vessels' onward, this answers the third challenge on depth and shallowness, which challenged them to be three. Here it explains that in accordance with function there are four; how could they follow practice and be three? Or it is said that 'vessels' refers to the objective realms. From 'Distinguished by practice' onward, this answers the fourth challenge based on people's sharpness or dullness. It intends to explain that although there are two people, there are four practices, and they cannot be made into two. From 'Because of being immeasurable' onward, this answers the fifth challenge on names, having two parts: first, listing the four section headings; next, explaining them at length. It intends to explain that 'immeasurable' has four propositions, so what prevents there being four kinds of immeasurables? From 'Kāśyapa said to the Buddha' onward, the third is receiving and understanding, as in the text. From 'World-Honoured One, are there bodhisattvas' onward, the second explains the non-gradual, namely the circular four minds, also having two parts: first, sorting out small friendliness; next, revealing great friendliness. Concerning these small and great: the small is also not small; one cannot take ordinary beings as small and the two vehicles as great, or the two vehicles as small and bodhisattvas as great. Why is this? Because ordinary beings and the two vehicles alike do not abide in the great nirvāṇa. Here, gradual friendliness is taken as small, and non-gradual friendliness is taken as great, because both of these abide in the great nirvāṇa. Some take the semblance as small and the true as great. This too is not so: gradual semblance and true are both small; non-gradual semblance and true are both great. Therefore, sorting out the small has two questions and answers. The first asks whether there are bodhisattvas abiding in the great nirvāṇa who have the mind of friendliness and compassion, yet it is not the mind of great friendliness. This directly asks about the gradual pure practice. Next, the Buddha's reply has three parts: 1. stating that there are; 2. explaining that there are; 3. concluding that there are. The initial statement is as in the text. Next, in explaining that there are, there are two parts: first, presenting the objective realms; next, explaining the contemplation. First, the objective realms have nine grades: enemies, kin, and neutral persons each have three grades. Some say neutral persons are only one, so there are only seven, because neutral persons are neither enemies nor kin to me, so there is no need to expand into three; at first glance this is so. However, these neutral persons are not without differences of foolishness and wisdom, nobility and baseness, so they can be divided into three, thereby forming nine objective realms, and thus there are nine friendlinesses. Next, from 'This bodhisattva' onward, directly explaining the cultivation of contemplation: if one has not cultivated at all, one only wishes to give the three kinds of kin the three kinds of happiness, the three kinds of enemies the three kinds of suffering, and to the three kinds of neutral persons neither give suffering nor happiness. If one begins cultivating friendliness, among the three kinds of kin one gives three grades of happiness, to the three neutral persons one gives three grades of happiness, and to the three enemies, to the highest enemy one gives lower happiness, to the middle enemy middle happiness, and to the lower enemy higher happiness. When cultivating for the second time, to the highest enemy one gives middle happiness, and to both the middle and lower enemies one gives higher happiness. When cultivating for the third time, to all three enemies together one gives higher happiness, which is not yet the three kinds of happiness of kin and neutral persons. When cultivating for the fourth time, one then takes the lower happiness of neutral persons and gives it together to the three enemies. When cultivating for the fifth time, one takes the middle happiness of neutral persons and gives it together to the three enemies. When cultivating for the sixth time, one takes the higher happiness of neutral persons and gives it together to the three enemies. When cultivating for the seventh time, one takes the lower happiness of the three kinds of kin and gives it together to the three enemies. When cultivating for the eighth time, one takes the middle happiness of the three kinds of kin and gives it together to the three enemies. When cultivating for the ninth time, one takes the higher happiness of the three kinds of kin and gives it together to the three enemies; this is called giving superior happiness to the highest enemy, and at that time it is called the fulfillment of the mind of friendliness. Furthermore, directly taking the three grades of happiness and giving them to the nine kinds of objective realms: when first entering the contemplation, to the three kinds of kin one gives the three happinesses; the second time, to middle kin one gives higher happiness, and to lower kin middle happiness; the third time, to lower kin one gives higher happiness; the fourth time, to lower neutral persons one gives lower happiness; the fifth time, to lower neutral persons one gives middle happiness; the sixth time, to lower neutral persons one gives higher happiness; the seventh time, to the highest enemy one gives lower happiness; the eighth time, to the highest enemy one gives middle happiness; the ninth time, to the highest enemy one gives higher happiness; this is called the fulfillment of the mind of friendliness. Now the text is merely brief, having four rounds of entering contemplation. The first round: to the three kinds of kin equally giving higher happiness—this combines the three kinds of kin into one round, and separately opens the three kinds of enemies into three rounds. If explaining the cultivation of contemplation, there are truly nine grades of different cultivation, but now the text only explains three grades. From 'Good son, this is called attaining friendliness' onward, the third concludes that there are. From 'World-Honoured One, for what reason' onward, this is the second round, which also has first questions and next answers. The answer has three parts: 1. stating it is difficult to accomplish; 2. explaining; 3. concluding. The initial text states it. Next, from 'Why is this?' onward, explaining: first phenomena, next similes. In all, it adduces four similes, as in the text. When afflictions are strong and friendliness is weak, it cannot be called great; only when afflictions are penetrated and friendliness is accomplished is it called great friendliness. From 'For this reason' onward, the third concludes. From 'Good son, when a bodhisattva abides in the first bhūmi' onward, this is the second, revealing the great: explaining that only the circular four minds are great friendliness. The text has two parts: 1. explaining great friendliness; 2. explaining the provisional and the real. First, great friendliness also has three parts: 1. directly explaining great friendliness; 2. explaining combined function; 3. explaining the root of goodness. First, directly explaining great friendliness also has three parts, namely stating, explaining, and concluding. The initial statement is as in the text. Next, regarding the meaning in the explanation: previously, to the highest enemy one gave higher happiness, but had not yet given higher happiness to icchantikas. Now this circular friendliness takes icchantikas as its object, seeing only the dharmatā and not seeing their faults, and therefore does not generate anger; only this is great friendliness. The third, concluding, is as in the text.