大般涅槃經疏 5.5

5.5

次從「汝可隨時」去，是復宗論。文為四：初復宗勸供，有勸有訶；二如來印讚，成前起後；三明悅可，有問有答；四明讚發，讚純陀之說、發文殊之迹。初又二：先勸、次訶。就勸供為三：一勸時、二勸速、三勸奉佛。勸時者，如初行時、初到時、病時、物新熟時，今最後供，是初去時。二勸速者，古佛道法過中不食，今速赴此時。三勸奉佛者，正為最後供佛涅槃。次「純陀下」訶，亦為三：一不知時、二不知速、三不知佛。初令時者，汝令時施，佛可時施，一切大眾不皆涅槃，此則非時。非時索施，理涉於貪。次不知速者，佛六年苦行尚一麻一米，今須臾間，何須速也。三不知佛者，汝謂如來實須食耶？文殊同他見謂須雜食，純陀申已解食即不食，故訶文殊墮三不知。次「爾時佛告」去，如來印讚成前起後。印其訶即是成前，讚其智即是起後。三、從「文殊語純陀」去，是明悅可。文為五：一偏慶悅可、二破偏悅可、三並悅可、四解悅可、五寂絕悅可。時眾謂純陀行淺，故佛印其所悅以破時情。初、文殊因此偏而慶之，汝說無為蒙佛悅可。次、純陀即以圓破偏，非但悅可於我，亦悅一切。三、文殊作兩番關並先定之，若定悅可一切眾生，我說有為亦應悅可；若不悅我圓悅，則破一切之義，是則不成還是偏悅，成佛愛憎，即作伏並。四、純陀覺其伏並，還解兩關：一無偏染悅可、二有普淨悅可。無偏為三：一彈無偏悅可、二釋無偏之意、三舉譬顯如文。次從「等視一切」去，明有普淨悅可，即是如來境界，非我爾所知（云云）。五、從「國王」去，明寂絕悅可，不應作偏普籌量。上文殊明有為無為且共置之，即是絕言不可說悅。此中意明有悅無悅是佛境界，不可籌量，即是絕思悅可。初譬分智不及究竟。王家駕駟譬究竟智，群下驢乘譬分真智。後譬分斷不及究竟。龜龍在水喻有無明，菩薩行故見不了了。金翅騰空譬無明盡，佛不行故見則了了。開善云：前是下不知上，後是上能知下。冶城云：兩譬皆是下不知上，初不知上智、後不知上境。靈味云：初不知法身，後不知應身（云云）。四、「文殊」去，讚發。讚純陀之說，故言如是如是。其既高推佛境不可度量，是故讚美。發者，拂我執一塗之義。因汝試我，試則非實，故言有為非有為。汝推未詳，故言無為非無為。前文殊云且共置之，則言語道斷。今純陀云是佛境界非我所知，則心行處滅。覈微則言盡，研極則思窮，故說觀皆寂。從「爾時面門」去，第四、催供。文為四：一催供、二請住、三領解、四辦供。前來諸瑞各有所表，故知此光正為催供。文殊前勸純陀時施靳固彈訶，今佛躬催不敢前却。催文為兩：謂光催、聲催。光催為兩：一催、二默。初催又三：一放光、二解光、三騰光。初放光中，照文殊者，上佛印純陀所說會教合機，今光照文殊亦扶上化下，二人論難皆由佛力。次、即知是事者，解也。數人云見色知心，文殊覩光遂解佛意。三、騰光催供，如文。次、悲默者，催供故悲，未諾故默。次聲催亦二：初三催、次悲哭。次「復白大眾」去，請住。文為兩：初告眾共請、次重請。初告眾，文為兩：初告眾請、次佛有酬。告請，如文。次佛酬，中二，先止亂、次說五門觀。觀中二：先作觀、次結。初六譬空，三譬無常，三譬不淨，兩譬無我，後總結。何故說五門耶？汝請住世本為開道，若能五觀與住不殊，若不能觀住世何益？《遺教》云「能持戒時，與佛在不異。」即此義也。次重請，亦二：有請、有酬。請，如文。重酬為兩：初酬、次釋。初文者，汝請久住為哀憫，我以入滅為哀憫（云云）。釋中二：長行、偈頌。長行如文。偈與下二偈意同，後當說之。偈中二：先偈、次長行止。

Next, from "You may according to the time" onward is the discussion of returning to the essential principle. The text has four parts: first, returning to the essential principle to urge the offering, which contains both an urging and a reprimand; second, the Tathāgata's endorsement and praise, confirming what preceded and initiating what follows; third, clarifying rejoicing and approving, which contains questions and answers; fourth, praising and revealing, praising Cunda's exposition and revealing Mañjuśrī's provisional traces. The first again has two parts: first urging, then reprimanding. Regarding urging the offering, there are three points: first, urging according to the time; second, urging haste; third, urging offering to the Buddha. Urging according to the time means: as at the time of first setting out, the time of first arrival, the time of illness, or when produce is newly ripe—here the final offering is the time of first departing. Second, urging haste means: in the practice of the ancient Buddhas, after midday they do not eat, so now one must quickly attend to this time. Third, urging offering to the Buddha means: specifically for the final offering to the Buddha's nirvāṇa. Next, Cunda's reprimand also has three points: first, not knowing the time; second, not knowing haste; third, not knowing the Buddha. First, regarding commanding the time: you command giving according to the time; for the Buddha it may be giving according to the time, but the entire great assembly does not all enter nirvāṇa, so this is not the time. Demanding a gift at the improper time in principle borders on greed. Next, regarding not knowing haste: during six years of austerities the Buddha lived on a single hemp seed and a single grain of rice; now in an instant, what need is there for haste? Third, regarding not knowing the Buddha: do you think the Tathāgata really needs food? Mañjuśrī shared the view of others that he needed mixed coarse food; Cunda stated his own understanding that eating is non-eating, and therefore reprimanded Mañjuśrī for falling into the three kinds of not knowing. Next, from "At that time the Buddha addressed..." onward, the Tathāgata's endorsement and praise confirms what preceded and initiates what follows. Endorsing his reprimand confirms what preceded; praising his wisdom initiates what follows. Third, from "Mañjuśrī said to Cunda" onward clarifies rejoicing and approving. The text has five parts: first, biasedly rejoicing and approving; second, refuting biased rejoicing and approving; third, challenging [the claim of] rejoicing and approving; fourth, resolving rejoicing and approving; fifth, quiescent and transcending rejoicing and approving. The assembly at the time thought Cunda's practice was shallow, so the Buddha endorsed what gave him joy in order to dispel the assembly's sentiments. First, Mañjuśrī used this to biasedly rejoice with him: "Because you spoke of the unconditioned, you received the Buddha's rejoicing and approval." Next, Cunda immediately used the perfect to refute the biased: "Not only does he rejoice and approve of me, but also of all." Third, Mañjuśrī made a two-fold dilemma to press him, first determining: if he definitely rejoices and approves of all sentient beings, then when I spoke of the conditioned, he should also rejoice and approve; if he does not rejoice in me, the universal rejoicing refutes the meaning of 'all,' and if that is not established, it is still biased rejoicing, establishing that the Buddha has love and hatred—this constitutes an implicit challenge. Fourth, Cunda perceived his implicit challenge and in turn resolved both horns: first, there is no biased, defiled rejoicing and approval; second, there is universal, pure rejoicing and approval. The absence of bias has three points: first, censuring [the claim of] biased rejoicing and approval; second, explaining the meaning of the absence of bias; third, adducing an analogy to reveal it, as in the text. Next, from "Viewing all equally" onward clarifies that there is universal, pure rejoicing and approval, which is the realm of the Tathāgata, not something that can be known by such as me, and so forth. Fifth, from "A king" onward clarifies quiescent and transcending rejoicing and approval: one should not calculate it as biased or universal. Above, Mañjuśrī stated that conditioned and unconditioned should temporarily be set aside together, which is the rejoicing that transcends words and cannot be spoken. The meaning here clarifies that whether there is rejoicing or no rejoicing is the Buddha's realm, which cannot be calculated, and is rejoicing and approval that transcends thought. The first analogy shows partial wisdom falling short of the ultimate: a royal carriage drawn by four horses illustrates ultimate wisdom; the inferior donkey-drawn carriage illustrates partial true wisdom. The latter analogy shows partial severance falling short of the ultimate: the turtle and dragon in water illustrate having ignorance; because the bodhisattva still moves, his vision is not clear. The garuḍa soaring in the sky illustrates the exhaustion of ignorance; because the Buddha does not move, his vision is clear. Kāishàn says: the former is the lower not knowing the higher, and the latter is the higher being able to know the lower. Yěchéng says: both analogies are the lower not knowing the higher—the first is not knowing the higher wisdom, and the second is not knowing the higher realm. Língwèi says: the first is not knowing the dharmakāya, and the second is not knowing the nirmāṇakāya, and so forth. Fourth, from "Mañjuśrī" onward is praising and revealing. Praising Cunda's exposition, he therefore says, "So it is, so it is." Because he exalted the Buddha's realm as beyond reckoning, he praised him. 'Revealing' means brushing away my attachment to a single path: "Because you tested me, a test is not real; therefore, conditioned is not conditioned. You deduced it without thorough understanding; therefore, unconditioned is not unconditioned." Earlier, Mañjuśrī said, "Let us temporarily set them aside together," which means the path of language is cut off. Now Cunda says, "It is the Buddha's realm and not what I can know," which means the place of mental activity is extinguished. When examined to the subtle, speech is exhausted; when investigated to the utmost, thought is depleted; therefore, exposition and contemplation are both quiescent. From "At that time from his face..." onward is the fourth, urging the offering. The text has four parts: first, urging the offering; second, requesting him to remain; third, receiving and understanding; fourth, preparing the offering. The various previous auspicious signs each had their own signification, so we know this light was specifically to urge the offering. Earlier Mañjuśrī urged Cunda to make the timely offering, and Cunda stubbornly censured and reprimanded him; now that the Buddha personally urges it, he dares not refuse. The text of urging has two parts: urging by light and urging by voice. Urging by light has two parts: first, urging; second, silence. The first, urging, again has three points: first, emitting light; second, understanding the light; third, surging of the light. First, in emitting light, that it illuminated Mañjuśrī means: above, the Buddha endorsed Cunda's exposition as conforming to the teaching and fitting the capacity; now the light illuminating Mañjuśrī also supports the superior to transform the inferior; the two men's debate and challenge were both due to the Buddha's power. Next, "immediately knowing this matter" is the understanding. Masters of the Abhidharma say that by seeing visible form one knows the mind; Mañjuśrī saw the light and thereupon understood the Buddha's intent. Third, the surging light urges the offering, as in the text. Next, grieving in silence: he grieves because of the urging of the offering, and is silent because he has not yet consented. Next, urging by voice also has two parts: first, urging three times; second, weeping with sorrow. Next, from "He again addressed the great assembly" onward, he requests him to remain. The text has two parts: first, addressing the assembly to request together; second, requesting again. First, addressing the assembly has two parts: first, addressing the assembly to request; second, the Buddha's response. Addressing to request is as in the text. Next, in the Buddha's response there are two parts: first, stopping the disturbance; second, speaking the five-gate contemplation. In the contemplation there are two parts: first, performing the contemplation; second, concluding. First, six analogies for emptiness, three analogies for impermanence, three analogies for impurity, two analogies for non-self, and finally a general conclusion. Why speak the five gates? You requested me to remain in the world fundamentally to open the path; if one can perform the five contemplations, it is no different from my remaining; if one cannot contemplate, what benefit is there in remaining in the world? The *Bequeathed Teaching* says: "When one can maintain the precepts, it is no different from the Buddha being present." It is precisely this meaning. Next, requesting again also has two parts: there is a request and there is a response. The request is as in the text. The second response has two parts: first, the response; second, the explanation. In the first text: you request me to remain long out of pity and compassion, but I enter cessation out of pity and compassion, and so forth. In the explanation there are two parts: prose and verses. The prose is as in the text. The verses share the same meaning with the two verses below, which will be explained later. In the verses there are two parts: first, the verses; second, prose stopping [them].