大般涅槃經疏 18.23

18.23

從「世尊以何義故」下，第二歎弘經人。文為三：一問、二答、三領。問如文。次佛答，歎菩薩有十三不可思議：一能發心、二受生死苦、三受地獄苦、四旋還赴救、五終不退轉、六度生死海、七能稱量生死、八能說常住、九生死不惱、十在胎不亂、十一於法不悋、十二遠離十惡、十三忘於功用。不思議者，舊云人所不測。是義不然，如人間事咸所不測，豈可以此亂於聖賢？今明三諦相即，不可以一二三思，心行處滅；亦不可作三二一說，言語道斷。雖列十三，實非是數，名不可思議。初不思議中云無有人教自能發心者，緣真發心則墮聲聞，理須人教緣俗發心則墮分別。須境教之，皆不得稱不可思議。若緣中道三諦相即則非真俗。不從人境，故言無人教者。明了佛性，故言自發。不雜名精，入流名進。地獄是舉生死果，諸結是舉生死因。累劫為此因果所燒，今了生死即是涅槃。又了諸結即是菩提，非復二邊，故名為一。動寂不壞，故名決定。燒身碎首無非正道，內不捨道、外不求救。此約三諦發心明不思議，與《止觀》中發心意同。次第二不可思議，文云所見生死無量過患，非諸聲聞緣覺所及，不生厭離者，二乘但知分段少分，而不知於變易過患。菩薩過之，故言不及。即俗真中，故言不厭。即中真俗，故言不離。約照三諦智明不思議，此與《止觀》安心意同。第三不思議，文云受地獄苦如三禪樂者，其文甚略，亦應更言受三界苦如涅槃樂。此約三諦上障明不思議，此與《止觀》通塞意同，亦似大慈。第四不可思議，文云如長者救子。宅譬中道，故言旋還。燒譬於俗，故言火起。出譬於真，故言出舍。此約三諦行，明不思議，此與《止觀》真正悲心意同。第五不可思議，文云見諸眾生厭生死過退為二乘，菩薩不爾，知生死常，不見其過；知涅槃近，不退取小。此約三諦證明不可思議，此與《止觀》道品意同。第六不可思議，文云聖人神通，譬體法智。修羅長大，譬次第智。人無兩種而能得度，譬圓教智。非通非次即圓智度，此約三諦位明不可思議。此與《止觀》次位意同。第七不可思議，文云藕絲懸山一念稱量生死者，即是稱量。一中無量、無量中一，非一非無量，是約三諦法明不可思議，此與《止觀》妙境意同。第八不可思議，文云無常樂我說常樂我者，隨病說藥逗會得所。此約三諦教明不可思議，此與《止觀》中對治意同。第九不可思議，文云不溺不燒者，雖在生死不為所害。第十不可思議，文云在胎不亂者，前是死不能滅，此是胎不能生。此約三諦報明不可思議，此與《止觀》中安忍意同。第十一不可思議，文云菩提與心皆不可說，說之無悋。此約三諦說默明不可思議，此與《止觀》中通塞意同。第十二不可思議，文云從身離身等（云云）。此約三諦業明不可思議，此與《止觀》中破法遍意同。第十三不可思議，文云終不說言我破煩惱。此約三諦無能無所明不可思議，此與《止觀》中離愛意同。此經明初心菩薩未入位時不可思議，意與《止觀》圓教菩薩十觀相應，故用釋此。文云「慧不能破，火不能燒」，他云：如是實法元用實慧，是一心故，故不能破。相續之法即是兩心，前滅後起，故能破惑，復伐於慧。若斷惑已，無所攻伐，故於實法而不能斷。然此中歎菩薩弘經，何須假實？但是推求慧不可得，故言慧不能破。例如求貪癡不可得故，故無貪癡。又生來生滅，滅不能滅；滅來滅生，生不能生。又生若是常，生不應滅；滅若是滅，滅不應滅。諸法例爾。此中直歎一切諸法皆無所有，智慧亦然，不存其相。

From "World-Honoured One, for what reason" onwards is the second part, praising the person who propagates the sūtra. The text has three sections: first, a question; second, an answer; third, confirmation. The question is as in the text. Next, in the Buddha's reply, he praises the bodhisattva as having thirteen inconceivabilities: first, being able to generate the mind [to seek awakening]; second, enduring the suffering of saṃsāra; third, enduring the suffering of hell; fourth, turning back to bring rescue; fifth, never backsliding; sixth, crossing the ocean of saṃsāra; seventh, being able to measure saṃsāra; eighth, being able to preach permanence; ninth, not being afflicted by saṃsāra; tenth, remaining undistracted in the womb; eleventh, having no stinginess regarding the Dharma; twelfth, keeping far away from the ten unwholesome actions; thirteenth, forgetting effort. As for "inconceivable," the old interpretation said it means what people cannot fathom. This meaning is incorrect, for ordinary worldly affairs are all unfathomable, so how could one confuse the sages and worthies with this? Now we explain that the three truths are mutually identical: they cannot be conceived of as one, two, or three, for the workings of the mind are extinguished; nor can they be expressed as three, two, or one, for the path of speech is cut off. Although thirteen are listed, they are not really numbers; hence they are called "inconceivable." In the first inconceivability, regarding the statement that without anyone's instruction one can spontaneously generate the mind: if one generates the mind by conditioning upon the absolute truth, one falls into the śrāvaka level; if one must have a person's instruction and generates the mind by conditioning upon the conventional truth, one falls into conceptual discrimination. Requiring an object and instruction cannot in any way be called inconceivable. If one conditions upon the middle way where the three truths are mutually identical, then it is neither conventional nor absolute. Because it does not rely on a person or an object, it is said that "there is no instruction from anyone." Because one clearly perceives the buddhadhātu, it is said to be "spontaneous generation." Being unmixed is called pure; entering the stream is called progress. "Hell" is citing the fruit of saṃsāra; the "fetters" are citing the causes of saṃsāra. Having been burned by these causes and fruits for successive kalpas, now one realizes that saṃsāra is itself nirvāṇa. Furthermore, one realizes that the fetters are themselves bodhi, no longer the two extremes, and therefore it is called "one." Being unbroken in both activity and stillness, it is called "resolute." Burning the body and shattering the head are nothing other than the true Way; internally one does not abandon the Way, and externally one seeks no rescue. This explains the inconceivable through generating the mind in terms of the three truths, sharing the same intent as generating the mind in *Calming and Insight* (Zhǐguān). Next, in the second inconceivability, the text states that the seen measureless faults of saṃsāra are not what any śrāvaka or pratyekabuddha can reach, yet one does not give rise to revulsion: the two vehicles only know a small fraction of the lifespan division, and do not know the faults of the transformation-body [level]. The bodhisattva surpasses them, so it is said they do not reach it. Because the conventional is identical to the absolute and the middle, it is said that one does not feel revulsion. Because the middle is identical to the absolute and conventional, it is said that one does not abandon it. This explains the inconceivable through the wisdom that illuminates the three truths, sharing the same intent as calming the mind in *Calming and Insight*. In the third inconceivability, the text states that enduring the suffering of hell is like the bliss of the third dhyāna: its text is very brief, and should also say that enduring the suffering of the three realms is like the bliss of nirvāṇa. This explains the inconceivable through the obstacles regarding the three truths, sharing the same intent as the unobstructed and obstructed states in *Calming and Insight*, and is also akin to great friendliness. In the fourth inconceivability, the text states that it is like an elder rescuing his children. The house illustrates the middle way, so it is said that he "turns back." The burning illustrates the conventional, so it is said that "a fire breaks out." Exiting illustrates the absolute, so it is said that he "leaves the house." This explains the inconceivable through the practice of the three truths, sharing the same intent as the genuine compassionate mind in *Calming and Insight*. In the fifth inconceivability, the text states that seeing all sentient beings revile the faults of saṃsāra and retreat to the two vehicles, the bodhisattva is not like this: knowing that saṃsāra is permanent, he does not see its faults; knowing that nirvāṇa is near, he does not retreat to seize the lesser. This explains the inconceivable through realization regarding the three truths, sharing the same intent as the factors of awakening in *Calming and Insight*. In the sixth inconceivability, the text states that the holy person's spiritual powers illustrate the wisdom that embodies dharmas; the asura's large size illustrates sequential wisdom; and humans, lacking both, being able to cross over illustrates the wisdom of the perfect teaching. Being neither common nor sequential is precisely crossing over through perfect wisdom; this explains the inconceivable through the stages of the three truths, sharing the same intent as the sequential stages in *Calming and Insight*. In the seventh inconceivability, the text states that with a lotus fiber suspending a mountain, in a single thought one measures saṃsāra: that is precisely measuring. Within the one is the immeasurable, and within the immeasurable is the one, neither one nor immeasurable; this explains the inconceivable through the dharmas of the three truths, sharing the same intent as the wondrous object in *Calming and Insight*. In the eighth inconceivability, the text states that for what is impermanent, blissful, and self, one preaches permanence, bliss, and self: according to the ailment one prescribes medicine, suiting the circumstances appropriately. This explains the inconceivable through the teaching of the three truths, sharing the same intent as the antidotes in *Calming and Insight*. In the ninth inconceivability, the text states that one is neither drowned nor burned: though remaining in saṃsāra, one is not harmed by it. In the tenth inconceivability, the text states that remaining in the womb one is not confused: the former means death cannot destroy, while this means the womb cannot produce. This explains the inconceivable through the retributions of the three truths, sharing the same intent as patient endurance in *Calming and Insight*. In the eleventh inconceivability, the text states that bodhi and the mind are both ineffable, yet one preaches them without stinginess. This explains the inconceivable through the speech and silence of the three truths, sharing the same intent as the unobstructed and obstructed states in *Calming and Insight*. In the twelfth inconceivability, the text states that from the body, departing from the body, and so forth (and so on). This explains the inconceivable through the karma of the three truths, sharing the same intent as universally demolishing dharmas in *Calming and Insight*. In the thirteenth inconceivability, the text states that one never says, "I destroy afflictions." This explains the inconceivable through the absence of subject and object regarding the three truths, sharing the same intent as departing from attachment in *Calming and Insight*. This sūtra clarifies the inconceivability of the initial-mind bodhisattva who has not yet entered the stages; its intent corresponds to the ten contemplations of the bodhisattva of the perfect teaching in *Calming and Insight*, which is why it is used to explain this. As for the text stating, "wisdom cannot break it, fire cannot burn it," others say: such real dharmas originally employ real wisdom, and because it is a single mind, it cannot be broken. A phenomenon of continuity is two minds, the earlier perishing and the later arising, which can therefore break delusion and furthermore strike down wisdom. Once delusion is severed, there is nothing to attack, so regarding real dharmas, one cannot sever them. However, here, when praising the bodhisattva propagating the sūtra, what need is there for the provisional and real? It is simply that when investigated, wisdom is ungraspable, and therefore it says wisdom cannot break it. For example, because when sought, greed and delusion are ungraspable, therefore there is no greed or delusion. Moreover, when arising comes to produce cessation, cessation cannot cease; when cessation comes to cease arising, arising cannot arise. Furthermore, if arising is permanent, arising should not cease; if cessation is ceasing, cessation should not cease. All dharmas are like this. Here it directly praises that all dharmas are completely non-existent, and wisdom is likewise so, retaining no characteristic.