大般涅槃經疏 20.14

20.14

「時大眾中」下，第二琉璃光論義，為二：一從遠來、二至已論義。初又二：先現來相、次正明來。初現相中，先放光、次問答。初放光者，乃是奇異。仍釋前問名為瑞答，以示來相。放光是光體，大眾遇光是光用。師子王定，即自在定。迹既自在，乃顯光體不可思議（云云）。「爾時文殊」下，二問答，又二：先明其本、次明其迹。初本又二：先無言辯本、次寄言辯本。初四菩薩相問皆默者，一顯諸法無言、二顯此疑應從文殊得解故餘人不答。文殊問佛，佛默然。眾見佛默答，咸謂文殊玄解；所以迦葉復問文殊，文殊又默，眾謂迦葉已解。如是傳傳，乃至五百。「爾時世尊」下，第二寄言明本。先問、次答，凡有七番，前六皆破定相、次一明因緣。私謂：此因緣答是破是立，因滅無明即是破也，如前皆默；熾然菩提即是立也，如後世俗。又前是自行破立，故眾皆默；後是為他破立，故答光緣。故知光之本者，莫逾菩提之燈，是故此光非色現色；從真起應，自彼而來放光召機，故非現而現。問：菩薩放光豈是常住？一云：藉彼佛力，故有常光。二云：彼菩薩是佛，自有此光。「佛言文殊」下，第二辨光迹，亦有問答。佛言莫入，即止其本；應以世諦，宜明其迹。迹文為三：初此述彼土、次彼述此土、三明菩薩欲來。

From "At that time, amidst the great assembly..." downward is the second [section], Liúlíguāng's debate, which has two: first, his coming from afar; second, his debate upon arrival. The first also has two: first, manifesting the signs of his coming; next, directly explaining his coming. In the first, manifesting the signs, first he emits light, and next there is a dialogue. First, emitting light is indeed extraordinary. It continues to explain the previous question and is called a reply through an auspicious sign, serving to show the signs of his coming. Emitting light is the essence of the light; the great assembly encountering the light is the function of the light. The siṃharājasamādhi is sovereign samādhi. Since its trace is sovereign, it reveals that the essence of the light is inconceivable (and so forth). From "At that time, Mañjuśrī..." downward is the second [part], the dialogue, which also has two: first, clarifying its root; next, clarifying its trace. The first, the root, also has two: first, discerning the root without words; next, discerning the root by relying on words. First, that the four bodhisattvas questioned one another and were all silent: first, reveals that all phenomena are wordless; second, reveals that this doubt should find resolution through Mañjuśrī, and hence the other people did not answer. Mañjuśrī asked the Buddha, and the Buddha was silent. Seeing that the Buddha replied with silence, the assembly all considered that Mañjuśrī had profound understanding; therefore Kāśyapa again asked Mañjuśrī, and Mañjuśrī was also silent, so the assembly considered that Kāśyapa had already understood. In this way it was transmitted along, even up to five hundred [bodhisattvas]. From "At that time, the World-Honoured One..." downward is the second [part], clarifying the root by relying on words. First is the question, next is the answer, altogether having seven rounds: the first six all refute fixed characteristics, and the subsequent one explains causes and conditions. In my personal view: this reply through causes and conditions is both a refutation and an establishment; extinguishing ignorance through causes is refutation, just as earlier all were silent; blazing bodhi is establishment, as in the worldly conventions that follow. Furthermore, the former was refutation and establishment in terms of one's own practice, hence the assembly was entirely silent; the latter was refutation and establishment for the sake of others, hence he replied concerning the conditions of the light. Therefore one knows that the root of the light is none other than the lamp of bodhi; for this reason, this light is non-form yet manifests form. Arising as responsive [manifestation] from the real, he came from that [land] and emitted light to summon those of appropriate capacity; hence, being non-manifest, it manifested. Question: Is the bodhisattva's emitting of light permanent? One says: Relying on that Buddha's power, there is permanent light. Another says: That bodhisattva is a Buddha, so he inherently possesses this light. From "The Buddha said, 'Mañjuśrī...'" downward is the second [part], discerning the trace of the light, which also has a dialogue. The Buddha said, "Do not enter [into it]," which stopped [inquiry into] its root; one should use worldly truth and ought to clarify its trace. The text on the trace has three: first, this [land] relates that land; next, that [land] relates this land; third, clarifying that the bodhisattva wishes to come.