大般涅槃經疏 4.15

4.15

從「佛告純陀如是如是」去，第三遮請，有長行、偈頌。長行為二：初述歎難。次以難遮請。初文者，夫六難展轉相依，三種無佛時亦有，三種佛出乃有。今述佛出時三難，餘者可知（云云）。次、以難遮請，為三：初以難遮請、二以佛境界遮請、三以二用遮請。以諸難遮請者，汝騰眾四歎自快六難，六難之與四歎，由我涅槃施汝常命，種種功德普及一切。我若久住無最後供，誓若不滿，眾不稱譽、名亦虛設，自失己利又障他人，那忽自欣後供而請久住？久住無後供、後供無久住，汝自矛盾，故遮言不應，意正有此。次「汝今」下，舉佛境遮者，佛之境界唯佛能知，非下地圖度，言語道斷心行處滅，至存彌亡至亡彌存。非存非亡即住不住、不住即住、非住非不住。如此境界，言之者訥、取之者失。絕其情慮，故遮云不應。問：純陀住十住地，那忽遮之同凡不知？答：知有六種（云云）。亦是為下而抑於高，高尚不應，下自息望。三「悉皆」下，舉二用遮請者，但佛境玄妙及佛勝用汝所不知。謂常無常二鳥雙游，去住適宜稱機隱顯，或時用住或用不住，只不住即住亦是非住非不住。昔用無常施得五果，一切諸行悉皆無常。若定無常，何得今教施常五果？遍一切法悉開無常，當知非常非無常、能常能無常。又昔用無常論五門觀，謂他境界；今教用常論五門觀，即自境界。豈定自他能作如此之自他耶？當知皆是佛之勝用，若用於常故無勞請，若用無常復不須請，故舉二用遮言不應。

From "The Buddha told Cunda, 'So it is, so it is'" onward, the third section is the refusal of the request, which comprises prose and verses. The prose has two parts: first, describing and praising the difficulties; next, refusing the request by means of the difficulties. As for the first passage: the six difficulties are interrelated; three of them exist even when there is no buddha, and three exist only when a buddha appears. Here he describes the three difficulties when a buddha appears; the others may be known [by inference] (and so forth). Next, refusing the request by means of the difficulties has three parts: first, refusing the request by means of the difficulties; second, refusing the request by means of the realm of the buddhas; third, refusing the request by means of the two functions. Regarding refusing the request by means of the difficulties: you reported the assembly's four praises and took joy yourself in the six difficulties. The six difficulties and the four praises stem from my nirvāṇa, which bestows eternal life upon you, its diverse merits extending to all. If I were to stay long, there would be no final offering; if your vow were not fulfilled, the assembly would not sing your praises and your name would be established in vain, forfeiting your own benefit and obstructing others. How could you now rejoice in the final offering yet request a long stay? If I stay long, there is no final offering; if there is a final offering, there is no long stay. You contradict yourself; hence he refuses, saying it is improper. The intention is precisely this. Next, from "You now..." onward, adducing the realm of the Buddha to refuse: the realm of the Buddha is known only to buddhas; it is not to be calculated by those of lower stages. The path of words is cut off, and the locus of mental activity is extinguished. At its utmost presence it is increasingly absent; at its utmost absence it is increasingly present. Neither present nor absent, it is precisely staying and not staying, not staying and precisely staying, neither staying nor not staying. Regarding such a realm, whoever speaks of it falters, and whoever grasps at it loses it. Putting an end to his emotional calculations, he therefore refuses, saying it is improper. Question: Cunda abides on the stage of the ten abodes; how could he suddenly be refused, being equated with ordinary people who do not know? Answer: Knowing is of six kinds (and so forth). It is also to suppress the high for the sake of the low: if even the high should not do so, the low will naturally cease their expectations. Third, from "All..." onward, adducing the two functions to refuse the request: it is just that the profundity of the Buddha's realm and the Buddha's supreme functions are what you do not know. This means that the two birds of permanence and impermanence fly together; going or staying is fitted to what is appropriate, being concealed or revealed according to capacity. At times he uses staying, and at times he uses not staying; yet not staying is precisely staying, and it is also neither staying nor not staying. Formerly, he used impermanence: giving obtained five fruits, and all conditioned phenomena were entirely impermanent. If it were definitely impermanent, how could the present teaching bestow the five fruits of permanence? Throughout all dharmas he universally revealed impermanence; one should know that it is neither permanent nor impermanent, yet capable of permanence and capable of impermanence. Moreover, formerly he used impermanence to discuss the five gates of contemplation, calling it the realm of others; now the teaching uses permanence to discuss the five gates of contemplation, which is one's own realm. Could self and other be fixed such that they can produce such self and other? One should know that all are the Buddha's supreme functions. If he uses permanence, there is no need to make a request; if he uses impermanence, again there is no need to request. Therefore, adducing the two functions, he refuses, saying it is improper.