大般涅槃經疏 31.18

31.18

「迦葉白佛」下，第二明菩薩除惑。即是諸菩薩等習此觀解，離諸結漏。若無中道力用，云何能令惑使俱盡？又四：一觀漏體、二觀漏因、三觀漏果、四結觀智。初觀漏體，有三番問答。此初文，先問三漏之體。佛答中，三漏為三。初明欲漏，又三：一出體、二引證、三結名。初出體，內惡覺觀即內心，因於外緣即是外境。「是故我昔」下，第二引證。此偈出《出耀經》。佛將阿難共行，見一女人將兒汲水，見一男子遂生染心，瞻目不已，因繫兒頸內兒井中。乃說偈自責云：「欲欲，我知汝根本，意以思想生。我不思想汝，則汝不得生。」說者或小不同，但明三漏，兩處不同。前〈德王品〉以欲界一切煩惱，除無明，是欲漏；上二界煩惱，除無明，是有漏；總三界無明，是無明漏。今文所明，以欲界中愛為欲漏，上二界愛為有漏，無明與我見合為無明漏。「是故一切」下，第三結名。次明有漏中亦三：初出漏體、次簡異欲漏、三結名。次明無明漏中又二：初出體、次明能生諸漏。此初一行餘，出體。從「無明即一切」下，第二明能生諸漏。文有三：倡、釋、結。「迦葉言如來」下，第二番問答。先問何以異說。「如是二法」下佛答，有三：初倡兩章門，一互因果、二互增長。「不善思惟」下，第二釋章門，先釋互為因果，「其能生長」下釋增長。「如子生牙」下，第三譬結。「迦葉白佛」下，第三番問答。問意言：佛前說第三漏云是無明，今復云何從無明生？「佛言如我所說」下，佛答，又三：先倡有兩無明。「若說無明」下，第二釋兩無明，又二：先明無明漏是內無明；次解從生是外漏，內心不了是一無明，而外復生煩惱，是外無明。「若說無明漏」下，第三結兩果。言無明漏名無始終者，謂得無始無終果。十二因緣無明最初，而能生於行識等果，如是因緣三世輪轉，名無始終。若得中觀，能焦因緣，成有始終，翻彼生死歸涅槃終。從無明生陰入等者，謂從無明生於諸漏，亦招陰果。

From "Kāśyapa addressed the Buddha" onward is the second [section], explaining the bodhisattva's elimination of delusions. This means that the bodhisattvas and others, by practicing this meditative understanding, abandon all fetters and outflows (āsrava). Without the dynamic function of the middle way, how could they extinguish both defilements and latent tendencies completely? This also has four [parts]: first, contemplating the essence of outflows; second, contemplating the causes of outflows; third, contemplating the fruits of outflows; fourth, concluding with the wisdom of contemplation. First, regarding the contemplation of the essence of outflows, there are three exchanges of question and answer. This first text begins by asking about the essence of the three outflows. In the Buddha's answer, the three outflows are treated in three parts. First, explaining the outflow of sensual desire (kāmāsrava), which also has three parts: first, identifying its essence; second, citing proof; third, concluding with the name. First, in identifying the essence, the inner evil discursive thinking is the inner mind, while relying on external conditions is the external object. From "Therefore, in the past I..." onward is the second, citing proof. This verse appears in the Chuyao jing. The Buddha was walking with Ānanda and saw a woman carrying her child to draw water. Seeing a man, she gave rise to an impassioned mind, gazed at him unceasingly, and consequently tied the child's neck and threw the child into the well. Thereupon she spoke a verse in self-reproach: "Desire, desire, I know your root; / Your thought is born from conceptualization. / If I do not conceptualize you, / Then you cannot be born." Commentators may differ slightly, but in explaining the three outflows there are differences in two passages. Previously, the "Chapter on the King of Virtue" considered all afflictions of the desire realm except ignorance to be the outflow of sensual desire; the afflictions of the two higher realms except ignorance to be the outflow of existence (bhavāsrava); and the ignorance of the three realms collectively to be the outflow of ignorance (avidyāsrava). What the present text explains is: attachment within the desire realm is the outflow of sensual desire; attachment in the two higher realms is the outflow of existence; and ignorance combined with the view of self is the outflow of ignorance. From "Therefore, all..." onward is the third, concluding with the name. Next, in explaining the outflow of existence, there are also three parts: first, identifying the essence of the outflow; next, distinguishing it from the outflow of sensual desire; third, concluding with the name. Next, in explaining the outflow of ignorance, there are also two parts: first, identifying the essence; next, explaining its capacity to generate all outflows. This initial line and more identifies the essence. From "Ignorance is all..." onward is the second, explaining its capacity to generate all outflows. The text has three parts: assertion, explanation, and conclusion. From "Kāśyapa said: The Tathāgata..." onward is the second exchange of question and answer. It first asks why there are differing explanations. From "These two dharmas..." onward is the Buddha's answer, which has three parts: first, putting forward the two propositions—one, that they are mutually cause and effect, and two, that they mutually increase each other. From "Improper attention..." onward is the second, explaining the propositions: first explaining their being mutually cause and effect, and from "Its capacity to generate and increase..." onward explaining mutual increase. From "Just as a seed generates a sprout..." onward is the third, conclusion by metaphor. From "Kāśyapa addressed the Buddha..." onward is the third exchange of question and answer. The intent of the question is: the Buddha previously stated that the third outflow is ignorance; now how can it again be said to be generated from ignorance? From "The Buddha said: As I have stated..." onward is the Buddha's answer, also in three parts: first, asserting that there are two kinds of ignorance. From "If one speaks of ignorance..." onward is the second, explaining the two kinds of ignorance, also in two parts: first, explaining that the outflow of ignorance is inner ignorance; next, explaining that what is generated from it are external outflows—inner non-comprehension of the mind is one ignorance, while externally again giving rise to afflictions is external ignorance. From "If one speaks of the outflow of ignorance..." onward is the third, concluding with the two fruits. Saying that the outflow of ignorance is termed "without beginning or end" means obtaining the fruit that has neither beginning nor end. In the twelve links of dependent origination, ignorance is the very first, yet it can generate fruits such as volitional formations and consciousness; such causes and conditions transmigrate through the three times, and this is called "without beginning or end." If one attains the middle contemplation, it can scorch causes and conditions, bringing about a beginning and an end, overturning that saṃsāra to return to the terminus of nirvāṇa. That the aggregates and sense bases are generated from ignorance means that from ignorance all outflows are generated, which also incur the fruit of the aggregates.