大般涅槃經疏 6.7

6.7

第三、從「爾時諸比丘」去，是疑執章。文為三：一執、二請、三疑。佛上斥奪，奪是所證未能即捨，是故有執。佛說新伊，一聞不解欲學須請。今昔兩教皆是佛說，何故一偽一真？故有斯疑執。文為兩：一敘悲苦、二正陳執。初文者，其聞佛說安住三法名入涅槃，了不思惟安住之義，而生去此住彼之解，是名悲苦（云云）。次從「世尊快說」去，是陳執。他云：述上聞法。上未曾說，但執昔教。就執為二：初執、後歎。執又三：一約教執理、二約行執理、三正執理。快說者，執昔之教，壯之言快，此教快能詮理故也。次譬如象迹者，執昔之行，行是進趣中勝，故以大迹為譬。行有智斷，想是智之初門，舉初為言。從「精勤」去，是執斷，斷思則知亦斷邪見，是故語後不言前耳。及無常想者，惑去智亡。從「世尊若離無常」去，正執理。此理中適，非離非不離，若離無常應不入涅槃，若不離無常猶具諸惑，以非離非不離故能斷諸惑。冥理會真豈復過此？斥言是偽（云云）。他解：離者則昔教為非，若不離者則昔教為是。觀文難見。次從「世尊譬如農夫」去，是歎也，歎上三執。秋時耕者，法有二能：一草不生、二水地肥。肥即歎教，草死歎斷。又肥即歎行，農法歎理，秋耕歎教，象迹歎行，無常歎理（云云）。

Third, from "At that time all the bhikṣus..." onward is the chapter on doubt and attachment. The text has three parts: first, attachment; second, request; third, doubt. Above, the Buddha reproached and deprived them; having been deprived of what they had realized, they were unable to relinquish it immediately, and therefore there is attachment. The Buddha spoke of the new *i*, but hearing it once they did not understand it; wishing to learn, they had to make a request. The two teachings, past and present, were both spoken by the Buddha; why should one be false and one be true? Therefore, there is this doubt and attachment. The text has two parts: first, recounting sorrow and suffering; second, directly stating the attachment. As for the first passage: having heard the Buddha say that dwelling peacefully in the three dharmas is called entering nirvāṇa, they did not at all contemplate the meaning of peaceful dwelling, but produced the understanding of departing from this and abiding in that—this is named sorrow and suffering (and so on). Next, from "The World-Honoured One has well spoken..." onward is stating the attachment. Others say: this recounts what they heard above of the Dharma. But above it was never spoken; they merely attached to the past teaching. Within attachment there are two: first, attachment; second, praise. Attachment also has three parts: first, attaching to the principle by way of the teaching; second, attaching to the principle by way of practice; third, directly attaching to the principle. "Has well spoken" attaches to the past teaching: "well" expresses admiration, because this teaching was well able to explain the principle. Next, "like the footprint of an elephant" attaches to the past practice: practice is superior among ways of advancing, so it is analogized by the great footprint. Practice has wisdom and severance: perception is the initial gate of wisdom, so the initial is mentioned. From "vigorously..." onward is attaching to severance: severing thought-defilements implies that one has also severed false views; therefore, speaking of the later, the earlier is unstated. "And the perception of impermanence": defilements gone, wisdom disappears. From "World-Honoured One, if divorced from impermanence..." onward directly attaches to the principle. This principle is properly centered, neither divorced nor not-divorced: if divorced from impermanence, one should not enter nirvāṇa; if not divorced from impermanence, one would still possess all defilements; because it is neither divorced nor not-divorced, it can sever all defilements. Blending with principle and tallying with reality—how could anything surpass this? Yet he reproached it as false (and so on). Another interpretation says: "if divorced," then the past teaching is wrong; "if not divorced," then the past teaching is right. Looking at the text, this is hard to see. Next, from "World-Honoured One, just as a farmer..." onward is praise, praising the three attachments above. Plowing in autumn: the dharma has two capabilities: first, weeds do not grow; second, the watered soil is fertile. Fertility praises the teaching; the death of the weeds praises severance. Furthermore, fertility praises practice, the farmer's method praises principle, autumn plowing praises teaching, the elephant's footprint praises practice, and impermanence praises principle (and so on).