大般涅槃經疏 4.20

4.20

初、勸說。譬有開有合，此開六慈，謂理乃至究竟。貧女至加復病苦以譬理慈。貧譬無智，病譬無斷，無有居家譬無常住五果，無救護者譬無主無親。女雖貧病有生子義，理無智斷而有解說之義。下文云「慈是一切諸善根本（云云）。」饑渴所逼游行乞匃者，即名字慈。無智為饑、無定為渴，癡散所逼欲求靜慧則素絲易染。薄知名數微達方隅，名字慈也。止他客舍，觀行慈也。觀五陰如逆旅暮合朝散，觀六入如空聚貪者求物。觀六塵如惡賊，愚不知避，焚灼憫之。豈非觀行慈也。齊此慈來通名解說，解說未彰，如女雖能生而子未顯，可譬懷胎寄生一子，相似慈也。向觀陰舍生清淨解，如寄生子。此慈說已彰，譬子生出。通前慈說悉有障難，至相似時，慈悉倚伏更五彊弱，故於此位說諸障難，實通前也。舍主驅者，此譬報障障於慧解。義言驅去，慈解同體，故言抱兒向涅槃城，故至他國。名字慈後、分真慈前，兩楹之間故言中路。遇惡風雨即內業障，蚊虻啑食即外業障，經由恒河即煩惱障。抱兒而度者，於三障中不捨正說，說陰界入非常非無常，說諸惡業非縛非脫，說諸煩惱非明非闇。以相似慈及相似解，障不能障，故言而度。水漂疾者，三障力彊激奪慈說，慈說體妙不屈三障，故言而不放捨。於是母子遂共俱沒者，慈與解觀俱從相似轉入分真，故言俱沒。如是女人慈念功德生於梵天，天者通是分真究竟兩慈觀。下合譬，其義自顯（云云）。從「文殊若有善男子」去，合譬，先通合四慈、後通合兩慈。通塗明者，從前理慈已來，不應偏渾、偏解、偏說。初文為三：一者正護不得偏說、二者引過不得偏說、三者乖理不得偏說。偏說非正護、正護不偏說，偏說無慧眼、慧眼不偏說，偏說乖正理、正理豈偏說？此中三文廣有所破（云云）。從「若正見」去，合後兩慈，合前許圓說不許偏說，合後開偏說不云圓說。若通論前後皆有偏圓而互現者，前未見機理，宜但許圓止偏，是故文云「自責愚癡」。後見機理尚許偏說，何況圓耶？是故文云正見者也。又正見者即是圓見，若見有無不名無為，具有無者方乃名圓。就文為四：先開偏說、次釋見機、三牒譬合初沒、四牒譬合後證。初開偏如文。次釋見機者，能為眾生是見世界機，生善法故見為人機亦是見第一義機，生憐憫心即對治機。三四如文。次從「如人遠行」是勸觀，有譬合。譬又二：初正勸、次重勸。初文者，六卷名為丈夫譬。此開六種觀義，謂理觀乃至究竟觀。遠行譬理觀，去後位遙名遠，理寂而照名行。中道譬名字觀，始末兩間通稱中耳。疲極者，煩惱勞累生死拘逼，謙卑請益皆是疲極。寄止他舍譬觀行觀，三界幻居猶如寄止，五欲非己為他權託，陰入如舍，無明所壓如臥，沈昏不醒如寐。忽然火起，火是無常，來無徑路，故言卒起。卒起無常，即報障也。上具三障，此略舉一。即時驚寤譬相似觀。昔來未得而今得之為驚，似解隣真為寤。言定死者，解惑相排，惑雖彊盛不久摩滅，如入海見平，故言定死。雖知定死即猶未死。未能入聖但在白法，故言慚愧。衣纏身者，衣以譬觀，身以譬境。若作偏觀，照境不周，是為可恥。圓觀圓境，無所可恥，故言纏身。便命終者，他以被問，難屈為死。然被難死，死者無量應生梵天，既不生者，當知非也。今言死者，似觀轉謝。生忉利天者，分真觀起，此譬兩成就：三十二臣即分真義，若就一主即究竟義。而言梵王及輪王者，更譬究竟觀，不生等顯其所離。「善男子」下，重勸勿觀。從「文殊如來真實」去，合譬，但合上即便命終分真觀去。「若能如是」去，合上生忉利天。他以此文三十二相合者，乃是合主，不是合臣。若爾，八十反應合八十種好。輪王無敵，應合十八不共法耶？今云八十種好亦不與他共，故皆合究竟。

First, the exhortation to teach. The parable consists of the presentation and the application. Here it opens into six kinds of friendliness, namely from the principle up to the ultimate. From the "poor woman" down to "further suffered from illnesses" illustrates friendliness in principle. Poverty illustrates absence of wisdom; illness illustrates absence of eradication [of defilements]; having no home illustrates lacking the five fruits of permanence; having no savior illustrates having neither master nor kin. Although the woman is poor and ill, she has the capacity to bear a child; although the principle lacks wisdom and eradication, it has the capacity for understanding and explanation. Below it says, "Friendliness is the root of all goodness," and so forth. Being "driven by hunger and thirst to wander about begging" corresponds to friendliness in name and words. Lack of wisdom is hunger; lack of concentration is thirst. Driven by delusion and distraction, one seeks quietude and wisdom, just as white silk is easily dyed. Having a slight knowledge of terms and numbers and a slight attainment of the general direction is friendliness in name and words. "Lodging in an inn of others" is friendliness in contemplative practice. One contemplates the five aggregates as an inn, gathering at dusk and dispersing at dawn; one contemplates the six sense-bases as an empty village where greedy people seek possessions; one contemplates the six sense-objects as fierce bandits whom the foolish do not know to evade, burning with passion, so that one feels pity for them—how could this not be friendliness in contemplative practice? Up to this friendliness, all are collectively called understanding and explanation; the understanding and explanation have not yet become manifest, just as a woman, though able to give birth, has not yet manifested the child, which can be compared to being pregnant with an only child—this is similarity friendliness. Contemplating the lodging of the aggregates just now gives rise to pure understanding, like giving birth to a child. In this friendliness, teaching is already manifest, like the child being born. Throughout the preceding stages of friendliness and teaching, there are obstructions and difficulties; when reaching the stage of similarity, the friendliness wholly subdues them with alternating strength and weakness, and therefore at this position the various obstructions and difficulties are spoken of, which in fact apply to what precedes. The "innkeeper driving her out" illustrates the retribution obstruction obstructing the understanding of wisdom. In meaning it is described as driving her out; friendliness and understanding share the same essence, hence it says "holding the child in her arms." Facing the city of nirvāṇa, she thus "reaches another land." It is after friendliness in name and words and before friendliness in partial realization; being between the two posts, it is called "midway." Encountering "foul wind and rain" is internal karmic obstruction; "mosquitoes and gadflies biting and stinging" are external karmic obstructions; "passing by the Ganges" is the defilement obstruction. "Crossing while holding the child in her arms" means that amidst the three obstructions she does not abandon the correct teaching, teaching that the aggregates, realms, and sense-bases are neither permanent nor impermanent, teaching that all bad karma is neither bound nor unbound, and teaching that all defilements are neither bright nor dark. Through similarity friendliness and similarity understanding, the obstructions cannot obstruct her, hence it says "and crossed." The "waters drifting swiftly" means the power of the three obstructions is strong, surging to seize the teaching of friendliness; yet the essence of the teaching of friendliness is sublime and does not succumb to the three obstructions, hence it says "and did not let go." "Thereupon mother and son sank together": both friendliness and contemplative understanding advance from similarity into partial realization, hence it says "sank together." "This woman, through the merit of her thoughts of friendliness, was born in the Brahmā heaven": the "heaven" generally refers to the two contemplative friendlinesses of partial realization and the ultimate. Below, in the application of the parable, its meaning becomes clear naturally, and so forth. From "Mañjuśrī, if there is a good man" onward is the application of the parable. It first applies to the four friendlinesses jointly, and then applies to the two friendlinesses jointly. To explain them in a general manner: from the preceding friendliness in principle onward, one should not be one-sidedly conflated, one-sidedly understanding, or one-sidedly teaching. The initial text has three parts: first, correctly protecting without one-sided teaching; second, adducing faults [showing] one must not teach one-sidedly; third, contradicting principle [showing] one must not teach one-sidedly. One-sided teaching is not correct protection, and correct protection is not one-sided teaching; one-sided teaching lacks the eye of wisdom, and the eye of wisdom does not teach one-sidedly; one-sided teaching contradicts the correct principle, and how could the correct principle be taught one-sidedly? In these three textual passages, much is refuted, and so forth. From "if with right view" onward applies to the latter two friendlinesses: applying to the former, it permits the circular teaching and does not permit the one-sided teaching; applying to the latter, it opens the one-sided teaching and does not speak of the circular teaching. If discussed comprehensively, both earlier and later contain both the one-sided and the circular, manifesting mutually: earlier, not yet having seen the capacity and principle, it was appropriate only to permit the circular and halt the one-sided, which is why the text says "reproaching oneself as foolish." Later, seeing the capacity and principle, it even permits the one-sided teaching, how much more so the circular? Therefore the text speaks of "those with right view." Furthermore, "right view" is itself circular view; if one sees existence or non-existence, it is not called unconditioned; only when possessing both existence and non-existence is it called circular. In the text there are four parts: first, opening the one-sided teaching; second, explaining the seeing of capacities; third, repeating the parable to match the initial sinking; fourth, repeating the parable to match the subsequent realization. The initial opening of the one-sided is as in the text. Second, explaining the seeing of capacities: being able to act for sentient beings is seeing the worldly capacity; because it produces wholesome dharmas, it is seeing the capacity for the individual as well as seeing the capacity for the paramārthasatya; producing a mind of pity is the antidotal capacity. The third and fourth are as in the text. Next, from "Like a person traveling far" is the exhortation to contemplate, which has a parable and an application. The parable also has two parts: first, the direct exhortation; second, the repeated exhortation. As for the first text, the six-fascicle [version] calls it the parable of the man. This opens six kinds of meanings of contemplation, from contemplation in principle up to ultimate contemplation. Traveling far illustrates contemplation in principle: being distant from subsequent stages is called "far"; the principle being tranquil yet illuminating is called "traveling." "Midway" illustrates contemplation in name and words; between the beginning and the end is generally called "midway." "Exhaustion" means the weariness of defilements and the constraint of saṃsāra; inquiring with modesty and seeking benefit are all exhaustion. "Lodging in the house of another" illustrates contemplation in contemplative practice: living in the illusion of the triple world is like lodging; the five desires do not belong to oneself but are provisionally entrusted to another; the aggregates and sense-bases are like a house; being oppressed by ignorance is like lying down; sinking into stupor without awakening is like sleeping. "Suddenly a fire broke out": fire is impermanence, coming without a set route, hence it says "abruptly broke out." Abruptly breaking out as impermanence is the retribution obstruction. Above, the three obstructions were complete; here, one is briefly adduced. "Immediately awakened in alarm" illustrates similarity contemplation: what was not attained in the past being attained now is "alarm"; similarity understanding bordering on the real is "awakening." Saying "certain to die": understanding and delusion repel each other, and though delusion is intense, it will perish before long, like entering the sea and seeing it level, hence it says "certain to die." Although knowing he is certain to die, he has not yet died. Unable to enter sagehood and remaining only in white dharmas, he therefore feels "shame and conscience." "Clothes wrapped around his body": clothes illustrate contemplation; the body illustrates the object. If one engages in one-sided contemplation, illumination of the object is incomplete, which is shameful. In circular contemplation of the circular object, there is nothing to be ashamed of, hence it says "wrapped around his body." "Then he died": others interpret this as being questioned, dying of exhaustion through defeat. However, if one died from defeat, the countless who die should be born in the Brahmā heaven; since they are not so born, one should know this is incorrect. Here, "died" means the similarity contemplation passes away. "Born in the Trāyastriṃśa heaven" means the contemplation of partial realization arises. This illustrates two completions: the thirty-two ministers are the meaning of partial realization; regarding the single master, it is the meaning of the ultimate. Speaking of the Brahmā king and the wheel-turning king further illustrates the ultimate contemplation; "unborn" and so forth reveal that which is transcended. From "Good man" onward is the repeated exhortation not to contemplate [improperly]. From "Mañjuśrī, the Tathāgata's true..." onward is the application of the parable, which only applies to the contemplation of partial realization from "then he died" onward. From "If one is able in this way" onward applies to "born in the Trāyastriṃśa heaven" above. Others match this text's thirty-two marks to the master, not to the ministers. If so, the eighty minor marks should match the eighty kinds of excellence. The wheel-turning king being peerless should match the eighteen unique qualities, should it not? Here we say the eighty kinds of excellence are also not shared with others, so they all apply to the ultimate.