大般涅槃經疏 28.10

28.10

「迦葉白佛如來具足」下，第三明說教不定。佛照根不同，說教則異。眾生不達根教之殊，執成爭論，能斷善根。為二：先問、次答。初問為三：一明知根、二明執爭、三結問何故作不定說致令起爭。初明知根，亦應知過去，特是略爾。「如是眾生」下，次明執爭，因茲廣出爭論之相，開善云二十爭論，冶城云二十一爭論（云云）。三「如其如來」下，結難（云云）。次答中，佛具答三問，此卷內答前兩問、後卷初答第三問。答初為二：初正明說教不定、次廣明不定法。初文為四：一明理深難解、二出愚智兩人、三明須不定說、四結知根力即四悉意。初言理深者，非六凡識所知，唯聖智能解，故是理深。此第一義意。次愚智中又二：先出智、次出愚。初智人聞有知無、聞無知有、聞有無知非有無，一二等亦如是。次愚人聞有執有以拒無、聞無是無而非有、聞亦有無以封雙存、聞俱棄而著兩捨，面聞尚然，末世轉尤，斯由不解對治悉意。三「如來所有」下，須說不定。此總據不定，有法、譬、合。初法者，為度眾生須說不定，本令得益，不令其執不定為爭。次譬中，如醫用藥元為差病，終不願其服藥成病。合譬中，為國土封疆不同，豈可一類。一類則無益國土者，如多寒國用毛褥、著皮鞾。時節者，饑饉時乞，唯得肉食。為他語者，如九住言不見，十住言少見。為人者，隨人根性。此即為人意也。四結知根力，即世界意（云云）。有一經文無結，應是遺漏。「於一名」下，二廣出不定法，又三：初正明不定法、次引證、三結非二乘所知。初文又二：初名義不定、後廣略不定。初名義中二：初列章門、次解釋。初列中，列三章門，如經。若欲對明，應有六句。對一名說無量名，應云對無量名說一名；對一義說無量名，應云對無量義說一名；對無量義說無量名，應云對無量名說無量義。今文略舉一邊。「云何一名」下，釋出，先釋三章門、後重釋第二門。釋初章，舉涅槃一名具含眾名。大亮云：涅槃八味之都名、眾德之總稱。意在於此。而諸師種種翻涅槃者，亦只因此而生爭論。次釋一義說無量名，舉帝釋釋者，與前何異？「前寄法後寄人」下，重釋中復寄五陰者，此寄果法，亦是一義而復多名，種種分別令易解故。河西翻婆蹉婆為好嚴飾，昔好衣布施，今報得麗服。富闌陀羅翻為調伏諸根，明天帝外以麗服嚴容、內以善法調意。摩佉婆翻為無勝，無過超諸天故。因陀羅翻為光明，光明最勝。千眼者，一時知千義、斷千事。金剛者，身相堅固。三釋無量義說無量名者，就如來萬德具足釋之，即是無量義；一義一名，即是無量名。八智有三解：一云常等無常等八。二云四諦各有法比為八。數人就欲界論法，色無色為比。論家就現在論法，過未為比。三云《優婆塞戒經》有八智，七如〈梵行〉中七善法，足一知根。四「復有一義」下，重釋第二章門。前約帝釋，止就善義有無量名，名不通惡。為顯斯意，重約五陰，此是有漏復名顛倒。陰是苦諦境，為念處所觀。觀色不淨、受苦、想行無我、識無常，復名四念處。但除色陰，餘四陰即是四識住處。陰通內外，故名四食。能通名道。因於實法有假名時，故云時；體即無相，名第一義。三修，即身戒心。煩惱者，正在行陰。解脫者，即有為解脫。亦名十二因緣者，即以五陰為因緣體。亦名三乘者，能成三乘之身。餘皆可解，不復釋（云云）。

From "Kāśyapa said to the Buddha: 'The Tathāgata is possessed of...'" below, third is to explain that the preaching of the teaching is indeterminate. The Buddha illuminates [beings'] differing faculties, so the teachings preached are different. Sentient beings do not understand the differences between faculties and teachings, and cling to them, turning them into disputations, which can sever the roots of goodness. There are two parts: first the question, and next the answer. The first question has three parts: first, explaining knowledge of faculties; second, explaining clinging and disputation; third, concluding with the question of why an indeterminate preaching was made, thereby causing disputes to arise. The first, explaining knowledge of faculties, should also include knowing the past; this is just an abbreviation. From "Such sentient beings..." below, next is explaining clinging and disputation, from which the forms of disputation are broadly set forth. Kāishàn speaks of twenty disputations, and Yěchéng speaks of twenty-one disputations (and so forth). Third, from "If the Tathāgata..." below, is concluding the objection (and so forth). Next, in the answer, the Buddha fully answers the three questions: within this fascicle, he answers the first two questions, and at the beginning of the subsequent fascicle, he answers the third question. Answering the first has two parts: first, directly explaining that the preaching of the teaching is indeterminate; next, broadly explaining indeterminate phenomena. The first text has four parts: first, explaining that the principle is profound and difficult to understand; second, presenting the two kinds of people—foolish and wise; third, explaining the necessity of an indeterminate preaching; fourth, concluding with the power of knowing faculties, which is the intention of the four siddhāntas. First, in saying that the principle is profound: it is not something known by the consciousness of the six ordinary realms, but can only be understood by noble wisdom; therefore, the principle is profound. This is the intention of paramārtha [siddhānta]. Next, in [presenting] the foolish and wise, there are again two parts: first presenting the wise, and next presenting the foolish. First, when a wise person hears of existence, they know non-existence; when they hear of non-existence, they know existence; when they hear of existence and non-existence, they know neither existence nor non-existence; one, two, and so forth are also like this. Next, when a foolish person hears of existence, they cling to existence to reject non-existence; when they hear of non-existence, they take it to be non-existence and not existence; when they hear of both existence and non-existence, they attach to the preservation of both; when they hear of abandoning both, they attach to the renunciation of both. Even hearing it in person was like this; in the latter age it is even more so. This is because they do not understand the intention of the antidotal siddhānta. Third, from "What the Tathāgata has..." below, it is necessary to speak indeterminately. This broadly relies on the indeterminate, having the doctrine, the parable, and the application. In the first, the doctrine: in order to deliver sentient beings, it is necessary to speak indeterminately; the original intent is to cause them to attain benefit, not to cause them to cling to the indeterminate and make disputes. Next, in the parable, just as a physician uses medicine originally to cure illness, he by no means wishes that taking medicine will become an illness. In the application of the parable: because lands and boundaries are different, how could they be uniform? If they were uniform, there would be no benefit. In terms of lands, it is like a very cold country using wool mats and wearing leather boots. In terms of seasons, it is like begging during a famine and receiving only meat. In terms of other speech, it is like the ninth abode saying they do not see, while the tenth abode says they see a little. In terms of persons, it accords with the faculties of persons. This is the intention of the individual [siddhānta]. Fourth, concluding with the power of knowing faculties is the intention of the mundane [siddhānta] (and so forth). There is a sūtra text lacking a conclusion, which should be an omission. From "For one name..." below, second is to broadly present indeterminate phenomena, which also has three parts: first, directly explaining indeterminate phenomena; next, citing proof; third, concluding that it is not what is known by the two vehicles. The first text also has two parts: first, the indeterminacy of names and meanings; second, the indeterminacy of broad and abridged. Under names and meanings, there are two parts: first, listing the headings; next, explaining them. In the first, the listing: three headings are listed, as in the sūtra. If one wished to present them as opposites, there should be six propositions: to 'for one name preaching immeasurable names', one should say 'for immeasurable names preaching one name'; to 'for one meaning preaching immeasurable names', one should say 'for immeasurable meanings preaching one name'; to 'for immeasurable meanings preaching immeasurable names', one should say 'for immeasurable names preaching immeasurable meanings'. Here the text briefly presents only one side. From "What is one name..." below, it explains them, first explaining the three headings, and later re-explaining the second heading. Explaining the first heading: it adduces the single name 'nirvāṇa' as fully containing all names. Dàliàng said: 'Nirvāṇa is the collective name for the eight flavours, and the general appellation of all virtues.' The meaning lies in this. Yet the various masters' diverse translations of nirvāṇa have also given rise to disputes merely because of this. Next, explaining 'for one meaning preaching immeasurable names': it adduces the explanation of Śakra; how does this differ from the previous one? In the re-explanation below, from "Formerly relying on phenomena, later relying on persons...", it again relies on the five skandhas; this relies on resultant phenomena, which are also one meaning with multiple names, distinguishing them in various ways to make them easy to understand. Hexi translates Vāsava as 'adorned with fine garments'—formerly he gave fine clothes in charity, and now in retribution he obtains magnificent attire. Puraṃdara is translated as 'taming the sense faculties', explaining that the heavenly sovereign externally adorns his appearance with magnificent attire, and internally tames his mind with wholesome dharmas. Maghavan is translated as 'invincible', because without fault he transcends all devas. Indra is translated as 'radiance', radiance being supreme. 'Thousand-eyed' means knowing a thousand meanings and deciding a thousand matters simultaneously. 'Vajra' means his bodily marks are firm and indestructible. Third, explaining 'for immeasurable meanings preaching immeasurable names': this is explained with respect to the Tathāgata being replete with myriad virtues, which is immeasurable meanings; one meaning having one name, which is immeasurable names. For the eight wisdoms, there are three explanations: one says it refers to the eight such as permanent and impermanent. The second says that the four noble truths each have dharma[-wisdom] and subsequent[-wisdom], making eight. The Abhidharma masters discuss dharma[-wisdom] regarding the desire realm, and subsequent[-wisdom] regarding the form and formless realms. The treatise masters discuss dharma[-wisdom] regarding the present, and subsequent[-wisdom] regarding the past and future. The third says that the Upāsakaśīla Sūtra has eight wisdoms, seven of which are like the seven wholesome dharmas in the 'Pure Practices' chapter, with the addition of one: knowing faculties. Fourth, from "Furthermore, there is one meaning..." below, re-explaining the second heading. Previously, concerning Śakra, it was only regarding wholesome meanings that there were immeasurable names, where the names did not extend to the unwholesome. To reveal this intention, it again relies on the five skandhas; these are tainted and are also called inversions. The skandhas are the domain of the truth of suffering, observed by the applications of mindfulness. Contemplating form as impure, sensation as suffering, conception and karmic formations as non-self, and consciousness as impermanent, they are also named the four applications of mindfulness. Leaving aside only the form skandha, the remaining four skandhas are precisely the four stations of consciousness. The skandhas extend through internal and external, and are therefore called the four nutriments. That which can lead through is called the path. Relying on real dharmas, there are provisional designations of time, hence it is called time; their essence is signlessness, called paramārtha. The three cultivations are body, precepts, and mind. Defilements reside precisely in the formation skandha. Liberation is conditioned liberation. Being also named the twelve links of dependent origination means taking the five skandhas as the substance of dependent origination. Being also named the three vehicles means they can accomplish the bodies of the three vehicles. The rest can all be understood and will not be explained again (and so forth).