大般涅槃經疏 21.5

21.5

「善男子當知如來」下，第二廣明不定。舊解諸句作一存一亡，非鬼至亡法身，非非鬼至存應身。今謂法應兩分還是定義，豈是不定？興皇云？非鬼法身不定，法身則亡非亡。非非鬼應身不定，應身則存非存。存非存，能鬼能非鬼；亡非亡，能非鬼能鬼。今謂皆未免定。何者？鬼定能非鬼、非鬼定能鬼，雖言不定，亦名為定。今明鬼即非鬼，亦即非鬼非非鬼；非鬼即鬼，亦即非鬼非非鬼。非鬼非非鬼亦即鬼非鬼，是一即三是三即一，無一無三一三不定，斯則真不定義。餘句例然。今先唱章門、次解釋。凡二十章門，但解十六，不釋四門。於第九短非短門中云現三尺身者，河西云：其家無兒，產一子，長三尺而死，父母悲苦失性。佛現兒像，父母見子還得本心，謂兒言：「我言汝死，汝何處來？」答言：「從死處來。因緣暫會，身屬眾緣，四大假合。遍觀眾緣，何者是身？」種種說法，惑心即斷，便現三尺佛身光明色相，長者得阿那含。非漏非無漏是第十六章，而最在後釋。何故爾？佛欲廣釋此章，故留在後。又私謂：諸門之中若漏無漏，凡夫聞之多易解故。又二：初明非有漏，其文極廣；後明非無漏，其文甚少。廣略相望，亦應可見。初非有漏，文為二：先明三漏、後明七漏。問：何不取三界煩惱為三漏，而取色無色為有漏、通取無明為無明漏？答：佛說無定，或轉三漏以為四流。然作三漏者，欲重故獨為一，色無色小輕故合為一，無明是根本通共為一。但數家稱為漏落生死，論家稱為漏失道理。今經意者，只是煩惱則名為漏。

From "Good son, you should know that the Tathāgata..." onward, this second [part] broadly clarifies indeterminacy. Old interpretations construed each phrase as having one affirmed and one negated: "not a spirit" negates the dharmakāya, while "not not a spirit" affirms the response body. We now say: to bifurcate the Dharma and the response is still a fixed meaning; how could it be indeterminate? Xīnghuáng says: "'Not a spirit' refers to the indeterminacy of the dharmakāya, so that the dharmakāya is both non-existent and not non-existent. 'Not not a spirit' refers to the indeterminacy of the response body, so that the response body is both existent and not existent. Being existent yet not existent, it can be a spirit and can be non-spirit; being non-existent yet not non-existent, it can be non-spirit and can be a spirit." We now say: none of these avoids fixity. Why is that? If a spirit can definitely be non-spirit, and a non-spirit can definitely be a spirit, although one speaks of indeterminacy, it is still called determinate. We now clarify that a spirit is immediately non-spirit, and is also immediately neither spirit nor non-spirit; non-spirit is immediately spirit, and is also immediately neither spirit nor non-spirit. Neither spirit nor non-spirit is also immediately both spirit and non-spirit. This one is immediately the three, and these three are immediately the one; there is neither one nor three, and one and three are indeterminate—this is the true meaning of indeterminacy. The remaining phrases follow this pattern. Now, we first state the section headings, and next explain them. There are twenty section headings in all, but [the sūtra] explains only sixteen and leaves four unclarified. Regarding the ninth heading, "short and not short," where it speaks of "manifesting a three-foot body," Héxī says: A family had no children, and then bore a son who was three feet tall and died. The parents were overwhelmed by grief and lost their senses. The Buddha manifested the child's image. Seeing the child, the parents regained their senses and said to him: "I said you had died; where did you come from?" He answered: "I come from the place of death. Causes and conditions briefly met; this body belongs to multiple conditions and is a temporary union of the four great elements. Surveying all the conditions, which one is the body?" As he preached the Dharma in various ways, their deluded minds were instantly cut off. He then manifested the three-foot Buddha body with its radiant physical marks, and the householder attained the stage of anāgāmin. "Neither defiling nor undefiled" is the sixteenth section, yet it is explained at the very end. Why is this so? The Buddha wished to explain this section extensively, so he left it for last. Furthermore, I personally consider that among the various sections, if it concerns defiling and undefiled, ordinary beings find it much easier to understand upon hearing. Again, there are two parts: first, clarifying "not defiling," the text of which is extremely extensive; second, clarifying "not undefiled," the text of which is very brief. The contrast between extensive and brief should also be evident. First, regarding "not defiling," the text is twofold: first, clarifying the three defilements; second, clarifying the seven defilements. Question: Why not take the defilements of the three realms as the three defilements, but instead take the form and formless [realms] as the defilement of existence, and universally take ignorance as the defilement of ignorance? Answer: The Buddha's teaching is not fixed; sometimes he transforms the three defilements into the four floods. However, in formulating the three defilements, because desire is heavy, it alone forms one; the form and formless [realms] are slightly lighter, so they are combined into one; and ignorance is the root common to all, so it forms one. However, the Abhidharma masters call it "leaking and falling into birth-and-death," while the treatise masters call it "leaking away the principles." The meaning of the present sūtra is simply that afflictions are called defilements (āsrava).