大般涅槃經疏 22.21

22.21

「如畜弟子」下，第二別釋四事，又二：先略、後廣。初略釋知識，又四：一善知識、二聽法、三思惟、四修行。初又四：先稱歎，有譬有合，如文。「善知識者」下，第二出其人。人有五別：一菩薩、二佛、三緣覺、四聲聞、五人中信者。「何故名為」下，第三辨其位。初明五位：一教離惡行善、二如說如行、三修菩提、四行戒施、五不自為為他。或以配前五人，未必須爾。「如空中」下，第四得善知識益。夫初月雖不可見，不得言無。初近知識，謂未有益，而實已潤。「若能聽」下，是第二釋聽法人，又二：先聽三經、後得三解。三經者，謂十二部、方等大乘、此經。尋此文意，似如一化初中後教（云云）。次「專心聽法」下，明三解，謂八聖道、十一空、大涅槃。有人以三解對前三教，今明未必全爾。於一一教中具生三解，文「以修習故得大涅槃。」若有能修八聖道者，即是佛性得大涅槃；徒聞涅槃不修習者，豈有能得三菩提耶？譬如病人下，釋第三思惟。下文以五塵、四相、無常為十相；今以五塵、三相、男女為十，只是教門不同。「云何名如法」下，釋第四，如文。「善男子第一真實」下，第二廣釋四法，亦為四。此是初，明善知識人略而文廣。先法說、次舉七譬。初法說中有三種語，悉是如來善達根機，應以耎語為說善法，應須訶責為說苦切，應須兩說即便雙用。七譬之中，或前喻或後喻（云云）。「云何聽法」下，第二廣釋聽法，又二：先釋、後引證。釋中有法、有譬。譬中有四譬。「是故我於」下，第二引證，又二：先引諸經、後引兩事。初汎引諸經。二從「以聽法故須陀洹」下，引二事證。先明初果事，即是須達得病，聞身子四說十慰喻，便得病愈。四種，即是此中四法。十慰喻者，舊云：八正道盡無生智。然初果無兩智。彼救云：見諦盡為盡智，見諦不生即無生智。此言無據。河西云：八正正智正解脫。此出《阿含》不得作餘解。無目謂凡夫，一目謂法眼，二目謂法慧。又無目謂散心凡夫，又一目謂天眼，二目謂天慧（云云）。「如我昔」下，二引身子事。佛遣阿難為其說法，阿難是初果，上果不伏聽下果法，令人舉床往佛所聽法便愈。「云何思惟」下，第三廣釋思惟，為五：一離五欲、二離四倒、三離四苦、四知住因、五解常。初文者，心思於法，寧復有心緣於五欲？若未聞法，橫計我常；既已思惟，我常倒遣。此中明滅，滅只是死。「云何如法」下，第四廣釋修行，又三：一明止行二善、二明空無常解、三明七種知見。知見又三：先標章門、次釋、三料簡。初標章門。次略列中舉實、不實兩章。實即有七知見，不實中無。「云何名為知」下，第二釋也。第一知涅槃，又二：先略出三涅槃、後解釋。一佛涅槃、二凡夫、三聲聞，後二皆少分滅耳。初明佛涅槃者，然佛具萬德，略言八耳。盡謂一切煩惱盡。善性謂如來所作一切皆善。實是不虛。真是不偽。餘四如文。外道涅槃八事者。若散心外道不涉此文。今取得非想定。能脫下地惑。故名解脫。即有善性；但非究竟真實常樂我淨。是故言無聲聞。六事者，互有與奪。不及佛故，奪其常我，只有六事；勝外道故，與其樂淨。此據有餘涅槃，故云無漏八聖道。有身智在，故云安樂。斷於子縛，故言清淨。「若有眾生」下，二釋上章門。不釋前一，唯釋後二。以佛涅槃此經盛談，無俟更廣，後二須解。此初，釋凡夫涅槃。「云何六相」下，釋二乘，文中明不真不實，以得無漏八聖道故，故言淨樂。未來當得大涅槃故，所以無常。後仍結異。次釋第二知佛性章門。下〈迦葉品〉中明五種性異：一者、佛佛性有七事，一常、二我、三樂、四淨、五真、六實、七善。二者、後身佛性有六：一常、二淨、三真、四實、五善、六少見。三者、九住佛性亦六，五不異前，第六可見。今此所明皆非佛佛性，以義異故。開善云：此二皆是九地佛性。若〈迦葉品〉則是約位分別，初地至五地有五性，六地至七地有五性，八九二地有六性，十地亦六性。後身佛性有七，即分判之。今此文不約位明六七，通據十地因位不可分別以配諸地。然須直知通辨十地，當見與可證並未具得，降佛已還通作此說。四者、八住下至六住，有五事，與常名不異。五者、五住至初住有五事，善與不善異耳。次釋第三知如來相具有一體別體，先明常樂之體、次言示道可見即別體。次釋第四知法章，亦具二義：一云常樂我淨一體法，後無常等即別體。次釋第五知僧章。常樂即一體僧，是弟子相即別體僧。次釋第六知實相。實相之體則非因非果非有非無，若據用者遍通諸果皆有異義。次釋第七知虛空。此前未說，而有行結之言。又三：一明真空、二辨事空、三明涅槃空。空乃無異，約法為三。又唯二空，涅槃自屬第一故也。初明真空，故言慧眼見，此見無見。「善男子空名無法」下，第二明事斷之空，舉此為譬。「善男子眾生之性」下，三明涅槃空。文云光明故名虛空者，二解：一云虛空不可見，但有通光明之用，若但空者無光明色，色若因空故得見色，若有障者即不見色因，空無障即見光色。二云虛空非識心所見，識心見光導生行心方得見空。

From "Just as when raising a disciple..." downward is the second part, specifically explaining the four things, which again has two parts: first, the brief, and second, the detailed. The initial brief explanation of the good friend again has four parts: first, the good friend; second, listening to the Dharma; third, contemplation; and fourth, practice. The first again has four parts: first, praising, which has a simile and its application, as in the text. From "A good friend is..." downward is the second, identifying the person. The persons have five distinctions: first, bodhisattvas; second, buddhas; third, pratyekabuddhas; fourth, śrāvakas; fifth, believers among humans. From "Why is it called..." downward is the third, distinguishing their stages. It first explains five stages: first, teaching them to abandon evil and practice good; second, acting in accordance with what is spoken; third, cultivating bodhi; fourth, practicing morality and giving; fifth, acting not for oneself but for others. Some match these to the previous five persons, but it does not necessarily have to be so. From "Just as in the sky..." downward is the fourth, the benefit of obtaining a good friend. Although the new moon cannot yet be seen, one cannot say it does not exist. When one first draws near to a good friend, one might think there is not yet any benefit, but in fact one has already been moistened. From "If one can listen..." downward is the second part, explaining the person who listens to the Dharma, which again has two parts: first, listening to the three sūtras, and second, attaining the three understandings. The three sūtras refer to the twelve divisions, the vaipulya Mahāyāna, and this sūtra. Examining the sense of this text, it seems like the teachings of the beginning, middle, and end of a single teaching period (and so forth). Next, from "with single-minded attention listening to the Dharma..." downward explains the three understandings, namely the eightfold noble path, the eleven kinds of emptiness, and the great nirvāṇa. Some match the three understandings to the previous three teachings; we now explain that it is not necessarily entirely so. In each and every teaching, all three understandings are fully generated, for the text states: "Because of cultivating it, one attains the great nirvāṇa." If someone is able to cultivate the eightfold noble path, that very thing is the buddhadhātu and attains the great nirvāṇa; if someone merely hears of nirvāṇa without cultivating it, how could they ever attain sambodhi? From "For instance, a sick person..." downward explains the third, contemplation. The later text takes the five sense objects, the four characteristics, and impermanence as the ten characteristics; here it takes the five sense objects, the three characteristics, and male and female as the ten; this is merely a difference in doctrinal approaches. From "What is called practicing according to the Dharma..." downward explains the fourth, as in the text. From "Good sons, the foremost, true..." downward is the second part, broadly explaining the four dharmas, which is also divided into four. This is the first, where the explanation of the person of the good friend is brief while the text is extensive. First is an exposition of the Dharma, followed by seven similes. In the initial exposition of the Dharma, there are three types of speech; all of them are the Tathāgata skillfully discerning faculties and capacities: if gentle words should be used, he speaks of wholesome dharmas; if scolding is required, he speaks harsh and stinging words; if both are required, he uses both together. Among the seven similes, some are prior similes and some are subsequent similes (and so forth). From "How does one listen to the Dharma?" downward is the second, broadly explaining listening to the Dharma, which again has two parts: first, an explanation, and second, citing evidence. In the explanation, there is both Dharma and similes. Among the similes, there are four similes. From "Therefore I, in..." downward is the second, citing evidence, which again has two parts: first, generally citing various sūtras, and second, citing two incidents. First, generally citing various sūtras. Second, from "Because of listening to the Dharma, the srotāpanna..." downward cites two incidents as evidence. First, it explains the incident of the first fruit, which is when Sudatta fell ill, heard Śāriputra's four teachings and ten consolations, and immediately his illness was cured. The four kinds are precisely the four dharmas here. As for the ten consolations, the old [commentary] says: the eightfold noble path and the knowledge of destruction and of non-arising. However, the first fruit lacks these two knowledges. They defended this by saying: the destruction of [the view of] seeing the truths is the knowledge of destruction, and the non-arising of [the view of] seeing the truths is the knowledge of non-arising. This statement is groundless. Héxī says: the eightfold noble path, right knowledge, and right liberation. This comes from the Āgamas and must not be interpreted otherwise. "Having no eyes" refers to ordinary persons; "having one eye" refers to the Dharma eye; "having two eyes" refers to Dharma wisdom. Alternatively, "having no eyes" refers to ordinary persons with distracted minds; "having one eye" refers to the divine eye; "having two eyes" refers to divine wisdom (and so forth). From "Just as I in the past..." downward is the second, citing the incident of Śāriputra. The Buddha sent Ānanda to preach the Dharma for him; Ānanda had attained the first fruit, and one of a higher fruit does not submit to listening to the Dharma of a lower fruit, so he had people carry his bed to go to the Buddha's place to listen to the Dharma, whereupon he was cured. From "How does one contemplate?" downward is the third, broadly explaining contemplation, divided into five: first, abandoning the five desires; second, abandoning the four inversions; third, abandoning the four sufferings; fourth, knowing the cause of abiding; fifth, understanding permanence. As for the first passage, when the mind contemplates the Dharma, how could it still have any mind to focus on the five desires? If one has not yet heard the Dharma, one falsely presumes the self to be permanent; once one has contemplated, the inversion of a permanent self is eliminated. The mention of "destruction" here simply means death. From "What is called practicing according to the Dharma?" downward is the fourth, broadly explaining practice, which again has three parts: first, explaining the two wholesomenesses of cessation and action; second, explaining the understanding of emptiness and impermanence; third, explaining the seven kinds of knowledge and vision. Knowledge and vision again has three parts: first, stating the topic headings; second, explaining; third, analyzing and distinguishing. First, stating the topic headings. Next, in the brief listing, two headings—the real and the unreal—are raised. The real has the seven kinds of knowledge and vision, while the unreal does not. From "What is called knowing..." downward is the second, the explanation. The first is knowing nirvāṇa, which again has two parts: first, briefly setting forth the three kinds of nirvāṇa, and second, explaining them. First, the Buddha's nirvāṇa; second, that of ordinary persons; third, that of śrāvakas. The latter two are both merely partial cessations. In first explaining the Buddha's nirvāṇa: although the Buddha possesses myriad virtues, only eight are mentioned in brief. "Exhaustion" means that all afflictions are exhausted. "Wholesome nature" means that all deeds performed by the Tathāgata are wholesome. "Actual" means not false. "True" means not spurious. The remaining four are as in the text. As for the eight items of the non-Buddhists' nirvāṇa: if it is a non-Buddhist with a distracted mind, they do not pertain to this text. Here, it takes the attainment of the concentration of neither-perception-nor-non-perception: because they can be freed from the delusions of the lower planes, it is named liberation, and thus has a wholesome nature; but it is not ultimate, true, actual, permanent, blissful, self, or pure. Therefore it is said to lack them. As for the six items of the śrāvakas, there is mutual granting and deprivation: because they do not equal the Buddha, they are deprived of permanence and self, possessing only six items; because they surpass non-Buddhists, they are granted bliss and purity. This is based on nirvāṇa with remainder, hence it speaks of the untainted eightfold noble path. Because the body and wisdom remain, it speaks of peace and bliss. Because the fetter of defilement is severed, it speaks of purity. From "If there are sentient beings..." downward is the second part, explaining the topic headings above. It does not explain the first one, but only the latter two. Because the Buddha's nirvāṇa is abundantly discussed in this sūtra, there is no need to expand on it further, whereas the latter two need explanation. This first part explains the ordinary persons' nirvāṇa. From "What are the six characteristics..." downward explains the two vehicles: the text explains that it is neither true nor actual; because they have attained the untainted eightfold noble path, it is spoken of as pure and blissful; and because they will in the future attain the great nirvāṇa, it is impermanent. Afterward, it still concludes with the distinctions. Next is the explanation of the second topic heading, knowing the buddhadhātu. Below, in the "Kāśyapa Chapter", five kinds of distinct natures are explained: first, the Buddha's buddhadhātu has seven items: (1) permanent, (2) self, (3) blissful, (4) pure, (5) true, (6) actual, and (7) wholesome. Second, the buddhadhātu of the last bodily existence has six: (1) permanent, (2) pure, (3) true, (4) actual, (5) wholesome, and (6) minimally seen. Third, the buddhadhātu of the ninth dwelling also has six: five are no different from the preceding, and the sixth is visible. What is explained here is not the Buddha's buddhadhātu, because the meaning is different. Kāishàn says: These two are both the buddhadhātu of the ninth stage. If it is the "Kāśyapa Chapter", it makes distinctions according to stage: from the first stage to the fifth stage there are five natures; from the sixth stage to the seventh stage there are five natures; the eighth and ninth stages have six natures; the tenth stage also has six natures. The buddhadhātu of the last bodily existence has seven; this is how he divides and determines it. Now this text does not explain six or seven according to stage, but comprehensively covers the causal stages of the ten stages, which cannot be divided up and matched to the various stages. Rather, one must simply know that it broadly distinguishes the ten stages, and that seeing in the future and being capable of realization are not yet fully attained; below the Buddha, this is universally explained in this way. Fourth, from the eighth dwelling down to the sixth dwelling, there are five items, which do not differ in the name "permanent". Fifth, from the fifth dwelling down to the first dwelling, there are five items, differing only in wholesome and unwholesome. Next, the explanation of the third, knowing the Tathāgata's characteristics, possesses both the unified essence and distinct essences: it first explains the essence of permanence and bliss; next, stating that showing the path can be seen is the distinct essence. Next, the explanation of the fourth, the section on knowing the Dharma, also possesses two meanings: one is the unified Dharma of permanent, blissful, self, and pure; later, impermanence and so forth are the distinct essences. Next, the explanation of the fifth, the section on knowing the Saṅgha: permanence and bliss are the unified Saṅgha, while the characteristics of disciples are the distinct Saṅgha. Next, the explanation of the sixth, knowing the dharmatā: the essence of the dharmatā is neither cause nor effect, neither existent nor non-existent; if based on its function, it universally pervades all fruits and each has different meanings. Next, the explanation of the seventh, knowing space: this was not spoken of earlier, yet there are words concluding the practice. It again has three parts: first, explaining true emptiness; second, distinguishing phenomenal emptiness; third, explaining the emptiness of nirvāṇa. Emptiness is indeed without difference, but according to dharmas it is divided into three. Alternatively, there are only two emptinesses, because nirvāṇa inherently belongs to the first. First, explaining true emptiness, hence it speaks of seeing with the wisdom eye—this seeing is non-seeing. From "Good sons, emptiness is called the absence of dharmas" downward is the second, explaining the emptiness of phenomenal cessation, raising this as a simile. From "Good sons, the nature of sentient beings..." downward is the third, explaining the emptiness of nirvāṇa. The text says that because of light it is called space; there are two explanations: one says that space cannot be seen, but merely has the function of allowing light to pass through. If it were merely empty, there would be no visible form of light; if form is seen because of space, then where there is obstruction, form is not seen; because space has no obstruction, one sees light and form. The second says that space is not what is seen by the conscious mind; the conscious mind sees light, which guides and generates the mental faculty of practice, and only then is one able to see space.