大般涅槃經疏 21.20

21.20

起卷明第二功德。他釋十德各各論體，謂初功德以五事為體，此功德以五通為體。今云不爾。此文云「以得大涅槃威神力故」，當知十功德皆以涅槃為其體，隨事分別種種不同，體應根本、義從枝末，而言十德、五通者，皆約無分別中而論分別。若十若五，舊云：初功德深、第二功德淺。此不應爾。上以四句開拓人謂為深，此中直說人謂為淺。若欲開此為四句者，不得得、得不得、不得不得、得得，餘章亦爾，何淺之有（云云）？舊云：大乘異小，唯佛乃具漏盡。菩薩乃是因人，故但五通，不說漏盡。此乃一往以因讓果，若具足論，唯佛世尊有真天眼，不以二相見諸佛國，他心宿命究竟在佛。菩薩既其分得五通，何以不云分得無漏？今此文中雖列五章，六通意足。舊用不得而得，是總標五通。今云不爾。不得得者得大涅槃，大涅槃者中道佛性，非漏非無漏之無漏，故文中非外道即非漏，非二乘即非無漏，而言得大涅槃，即非漏非無漏之無漏。釋云：所謂神通者，不如小乘十八變化之神通。神名天心，通名慧性。天然之慧即是中道，無二邊漏名大涅槃，指此而為無漏通也。私謂：驗此十德皆證。初文既有知於略藏，豈有不能分證六通？故知德文皆悉互通為辨，不別而別故十相不同，別而不別同一涅槃，是故對地亦應無失。況復十地義通圓別，別而不別圓義也，不別而別別義也。若依此意，以此十德中之法門，一一皆挾十地，帶圓法門作通別釋，彌益其美。此則與經部會、與五時會、與諸教會、與逗機會。

Opening the fascicle, the second power is explained. Other commentators explain the ten powers each in terms of their own essence, claiming that the first power has the five matters as its essence, and this [second] power has the five superknowledges as its essence. Now we say this is not so. This text states, “Because of attaining the mighty spiritual power of the great nirvāṇa,” so one should know that all ten powers take nirvāṇa as their essence. Differentiated variously according to phenomena, the essence corresponds to the root, while the meanings follow the branches; and speaking of ten powers and five superknowledges is entirely discussing differentiation within the non-differentiated. Whether ten or five, former masters said: the first power is deep, and the second power is shallow. This should not be so. Above, because it was expanded into four propositions, people considered it deep; here, being stated directly, people consider it shallow. If one wishes to expand this into four propositions: obtaining without obtaining, obtaining not-obtaining, not obtaining not-obtaining, and obtaining obtaining; the other sections are also like this—how could it be shallow (and so forth)? Former masters said: the Great Vehicle differs from the Small [Vehicle] in that only the Buddha is complete in the cessation of outflows. Bodhisattvas are persons on the cause stage, hence they only have the five superknowledges, without speaking of the cessation of outflows. This is merely a provisional concession of the fruit to the cause. If discussed completely, only the Buddha, the World-Honoured One, possesses the true divine eye, viewing the buddha-lands without dual signs; knowledge of others' minds and recollection of past lives are ultimate only in the Buddha. Since bodhisattvas partially obtain the five superknowledges, why would one not say they partially obtain the outflow-free? Although five sections are listed in this text, the sense of the six superknowledges is complete. Former masters took “obtaining without obtaining” as a general designation of the five superknowledges. Now we say this is not so. “Obtaining without obtaining” means obtaining the great nirvāṇa; the great nirvāṇa is the middle way buddhadhātu, the outflow-free that is neither with outflows nor without outflows. Hence in the text, not being an outer path means not having outflows, not being the two vehicles means not being without outflows; and speaking of obtaining the great nirvāṇa means the outflow-free that is neither with outflows nor without outflows. The explanation says: The so-called superknowledges are not like the superknowledges of the eighteen transformations of the Small Vehicle. “Super” (*shen*) designates the celestial mind; “knowledge” (*tong*) designates the nature of wisdom. Natural wisdom is the middle way; being devoid of the outflows of the two extremes is called the great nirvāṇa; pointing to this constitutes the outflow-free superknowledge. I privately remark: Examining this, all ten powers are realized. Since the initial text already had knowledge of the condensed treasury, how could one not be able to partially realize the six superknowledges? Therefore, one knows that the texts on the powers are all mutually penetrating in their elucidation. Differentiated without being different, the ten aspects are distinct; distinct without being distinct, they are identical in the one nirvāṇa. Therefore, matching them with the stages should also be without error. How much more so as the meaning of the ten stages penetrates both the perfect and the distinct: distinct without being distinct is the meaning of the perfect; not distinct yet distinct is the meaning of the distinct. If, relying on this meaning, the dharma-gates within these ten powers are each taken to encompass the ten stages, bringing along the perfect dharma-gate to make an explanation of both penetration and distinction, it will be all the more magnificent. This then accords with the sūtra collections, accords with the five periods, accords with the various teachings, and accords with responding to capacities.