大般涅槃經疏 33.14

33.14

「爾時文殊白佛」下，第二更論義釋疑。復為二：初問、次答。問中復二：初問具出菩薩自能流通。從「何因緣故」下，此問阿難何為獨蒙顧問。「爾時世尊告文殊言」下，二答，文為三：初具述本緣、次現前稱歎、三正答二問。此初具述本緣。即是如來昔於僧中，命覓侍者之本緣（云云）。「文殊師利阿難」下，第二現前稱歎。若阿難在眾，豈得歎美？又二：前歎八事不可思議、次歎希有。又云毘舍浮佛七佛之名，定應如此脫。有本有舍浮者，非。從「如汝所說」下，第三正答二問，明菩薩雖能流通，各有重任調伏眷屬，故不付囑。阿難下果，親為侍者，多聞最上，所以付之。〈長壽品〉初盛明聲聞不堪、菩薩堪受，今付阿難、不付菩薩，此有三義：一者前訶實行故言不堪，今明是權故言其堪。二者對揚大法弘宣深理其即不堪，於教文言受持章段其即堪能。下文自云若阿難所不知者，弘廣菩薩自為宣說。深義正理即付菩薩。三者明聲聞者自有與奪，奪故不堪、與故言堪。文云是吾弟者，此是從弟，但欲論近，不復言從，直云是吾之弟。所未聞者弘廣菩薩當能流布者，此有三解。一冶城云：十外數中迹居第九，實是菩薩，是故佛言弘廣菩薩自能流布。二者招提云：佛法之中大士何𮥍，而忽取同外道名謂能弘經，言弘廣者非據一人，但能弘通教化利益即是弘廣。故《大智論》結集法藏中具明其事。迦葉對阿難則出修多羅、阿毘曇，對優波離出於毘尼即是律藏。若文殊師利與彌勒等對阿難出大乘藏，是則文殊彌勒即是弘廣菩薩。第三解：既非外道又非通說，別有菩薩名為弘廣，如言普賢、文殊等之流。

From "At that time Mañjuśrī said to the Buddha" below, the second [part] further debates the meaning to resolve doubts, which again has two parts: first, questioning; next, replying. The question also has two: first, stating in full that the bodhisattvas themselves are capable of propagation; from "For what cause and condition" below, this asks why Ānanda alone received the inquiry and concern. From "At that time the World-Honoured One addressed Mañjuśrī, saying" below is the second [part], the reply, which has three parts: first, recounting the original circumstances in full; next, praising him directly in person; third, properly answering the two questions. This first part recounts the original circumstances in full; that is, the original circumstances of the Tathāgata in the past seeking an attendant among the Saṅgha (and so forth). From "Mañjuśrī, Ānanda..." below is the second part, praising him directly in person. If Ānanda were present in the assembly, how could he have been so praised? This also has two: first, praising the eight inconceivable matters; next, praising their rarity. Furthermore, it mentions the name of Viśvabhū Buddha among the seven buddhas; this must be an omission in this text—editions with Shefu are incorrect. From "As you have said" below is the third part, properly answering the two questions, clarifying that although the bodhisattvas are capable of propagation, each has the heavy responsibility of taming their own retinue, which is why it was not entrusted to them. Ānanda held a lower fruit, was personally the attendant, and was foremost in hearing much; therefore, it was entrusted to him. At the beginning of the "Chapter on Longevity," it was emphatically clarified that śrāvakas are incapable while bodhisattvas are capable of receiving it; now entrusting it to Ānanda and not to the bodhisattvas has three meanings: First, earlier he rebuked actual practice, hence saying they were incapable; now he clarifies provisionality, hence saying he is capable. Second, for expounding the great Dharma and propagating the profound principle, he would be incapable, but for accepting and retaining the chapter divisions and phrases of the textual teaching, he is capable. The lower text itself says that what Ānanda does not know, the bodhisattva Vastly Broad will expound of his own accord; the profound meanings and correct principles are entrusted to the bodhisattvas. Third, it clarifies that regarding śrāvakas, there is granting and stripping away: stripping away means incapable; granting means capable. As for the text saying "he is my younger brother," he was a paternal cousin, but wishing to speak of closeness, it does not say "cousin," but simply "he is my younger brother." As for "what has not been heard, the bodhisattva Vastly Broad will be able to disseminate," there are three interpretations: First, Yecheng says that among the ten non-Buddhists, he ranked ninth in trace, but was actually a bodhisattva; therefore, the Buddha said the bodhisattva Vastly Broad would be able to disseminate it of his own accord. Second, Zhaoti says: In the Buddha's Dharma, great beings are so numerous, why suddenly take a name identical to a non-Buddhist and claim he could propagate the sūtra? The name "Vastly Broad" does not refer to a single person: whoever can propagate the teaching and benefit others is "vastly broad." Therefore, the Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom in its account of the compilation of the Dharma treasury clarifies this fully: before Ānanda, Kāśyapa brought forth the sūtras and abhidharma, while before Upāli he brought forth the vinaya, which is the Vinaya Piṭaka; if Mañjuśrī, Maitreya, and others, together with Ānanda, brought forth the Mahāyāna Piṭaka, then Mañjuśrī and Maitreya are themselves the bodhisattva Vastly Broad. The third explanation: it is neither a non-Buddhist nor a generic designation, but a distinct bodhisattva named Vastly Broad, belonging to the class of Samantabhadra, Mañjuśrī, and the like.