大般涅槃經疏 27.8

27.8

「善男子若有菩薩修習」下，第三修道力用，文為二：初明感樂得涅槃、後明離苦轉障。初文又二：初明得涅槃、次論義。論義有兩番問答：初問躡修三法能得涅槃故問其相。文為二：初牒無十相名大涅槃。但因答竟，此旨已領，未解其餘，更以十法為問。開善取此諸結火滅名為滅度，以翻涅槃。莊嚴取離諸覺觀名為涅槃，以彈開善，云：子縛盡名滅度，果縛盡名涅槃。云何取子縛之文翻涅槃之果？開善救云：具存外國，子果縛盡俱名解脫，有餘無餘二滅俱名滅度，而出經者巧互其詞，以子縛盡存此音為滅度，果縛盡存彼音為解脫。然此中十答，皆答涅槃之圓德，兩師各執一句而起於爭，此是因於解義而起煩惱，又同觸象（云云）。「師子吼」下，師子吼重問。已聞十義未知修者，為修幾法得涅槃耶？次「佛言」下，佛答。答意者，向之十法但是涅槃果果之異耳。若欲修行，復具十法。於中三：標、釋、結。「師子吼言如佛先告」下，第二明離苦轉障，又二：先明所轉之業障、次明能轉之治道。初有二番問答：初番明業不定故障可轉、次明業不定故道可修。初問答為二：先問善業、次問惡業。初問善業為五：一明無窮、二明必定、三重無窮、四重必定、五舉況結問。初又三：一語端、二領旨、三結問。初告純陀者，此欲設問之由。「漸如佛」下，領旨。施畜生百倍、闡提千倍者，畜生前因惡今報卑，闡提取前因善今報勝，故有百千之殊。上文殺畜生得下罪、殺闡提無罪，此復云何？答：畜無斷善謗法之愆，闡提有此之失。「純陀大士」下，結問。次「世尊經中復說」下，問必定，又二：先領、次正問純陀。心重而因勝，此業決定，何得成佛？三「世尊經中說」下，重明無窮。四「世尊經中說」下，重明必定。五「又阿尼樓馱」下，舉況結問。

From "Good sons, if there are bodhisattvas who cultivate" onward is the third [section], on the power and function of cultivating the path, which has two parts: first, explaining how experiencing joy leads to attaining nirvāṇa; second, explaining how leaving suffering behind transforms hindrances. The first part also has two [sections]: first, explaining the attainment of nirvāṇa; next, debating the doctrine. The doctrinal debate consists of two rounds of questions and answers. The first question takes up the point that cultivating the three dharmas brings about the attainment of nirvāṇa, and thus asks about its marks. The text has two [parts]: first, it cites that being devoid of the ten marks is called great nirvāṇa. But since the causal response had concluded, this essential purport was already grasped, while the remainder was not yet understood, so he further asks about the ten dharmas. Kāishàn took this extinction of the fires of defilement to be called "extinction and deliverance" (mièdù), using it to translate nirvāṇa. Zhuāngyán took the separation from all discursive thought to be called nirvāṇa, criticizing Kāishàn by saying: "The exhaustion of seed-bonds (zǐfù) is called extinction and deliverance, while the exhaustion of fruit-bonds (guǒfù) is called nirvāṇa. How can one take a passage on seed-bonds to translate the fruit of nirvāṇa?" Kāishàn defended himself, saying: "Fully preserved in the foreign language, the exhaustion of both seed- and fruit-bonds is called liberation, and both extinctions—with remainder and without remainder—are called extinction and deliverance; but the translators of the sūtra skillfully alternated their phrasing, retaining this phonetic rendering as extinction and deliverance for the exhaustion of seed-bonds, and retaining that phonetic rendering as liberation for the exhaustion of fruit-bonds." However, the ten answers here all answer regarding the perfect virtues of nirvāṇa; the two masters each clung to a single line and stirred up disputes, which is giving rise to afflictions based on interpreting doctrines, and is also akin to touching the elephant (and so forth). From "Siṃhanāda" onward, Siṃhanāda questions again. Having already heard the ten meanings, he does not yet know how many dharmas the practitioner must cultivate to attain nirvāṇa. Next, from "The Buddha said" onward, the Buddha answers. The purport of the answer is that the aforementioned ten dharmas were merely the distinctions among the fruits of the fruits of nirvāṇa. If one wishes to practice, one must further be endowed with ten dharmas. Therein are three parts: presentation, explanation, and conclusion. From "Siṃhanāda said: 'As the Buddha previously declared'" onward is the second [major section], explaining how leaving suffering behind transforms hindrances, which also has two parts: first, explaining the karmic hindrances that are transformed; next, explaining the curative path that can transform them. First, there are two rounds of questions and answers: the first round explains that because karma is indeterminate, hindrances can be transformed; the next explains that because karma is indeterminate, the path can be cultivated. The first question and answer has two [parts]: first, inquiring about wholesome karma; next, inquiring about unwholesome karma. The initial inquiry into wholesome karma has five [points]: first, explaining its inexhaustibility; second, explaining its certainty; third, reiterating its inexhaustibility; fourth, reiterating its certainty; fifth, drawing a comparison to conclude the question. The first point also has three parts: first, the opening words; second, grasping the purport; third, concluding the question. The initial address to Cunda is the reason for posing the question. From "Gradually, as the Buddha" onward, he grasps the purport. Giving to an animal yields a hundredfold [reward], and to an icchantika a thousandfold: for the animal, the previous cause was evil and the present retribution is base; for the icchantika, the previous cause was wholesome and the present retribution is superior; hence there is the difference of a hundred and a thousand. Above it was said that killing an animal incurs a minor offense, while killing an icchantika incurs no offense; how is this reconciled? Answer: animals have no fault of severing wholesome roots and slandering the Dharma, whereas icchantikas have this fault. From "Great Being Cunda" onward, he concludes the question. Next, from "World-Honoured One, in the sūtra it is further said" onward, he asks about certainty, which also has two [parts]: first, grasping [the meaning]; next, directly questioning regarding Cunda. If the intention was profound and the cause superior, this karma is fixed; how could he become a Buddha? Third, from "World-Honoured One, in the sūtra it is said" onward, he reiterates inexhaustibility. Fourth, from "World-Honoured One, in the sūtra it is said" onward, he reiterates certainty. Fifth, from "Furthermore, Aniruddha" onward, he draws a comparison to conclude the question.