大般涅槃經疏 9.10

9.10

就正他，文為四：初以歡喜正他、二以無我正他、三以常樂正他、四以第一義正他。初文者知而故問。令汝歡喜，豈非世界？以無我無常調伏賢聖令生善根，豈非為人？出世常樂破世無常，豈非對治？若欲遠行寶付善子，即第一義。尋文會義，理甚分明。夫乳養嬰兒止可含酥，若耎強食，食俱不可。正他亦爾，從微之著漸而正之。女人能生，譬慈是善本。嬰兒，譬初信。始生乳養，譬聞法自資。含酥，譬贊歎歡喜。贊歎逸美益更成病，故云多含兒酥將無夭壽。酥尚莫多，況強耎食。喜逸妨道，況生善與對治，故須籌量。含酥譬世界，故文云「如來實說令我歡喜。」又女人心疑，含酥太多不得聽法，佛為解釋令得專心，是正他相。又嬰兒稍大，節乳與食，此譬勸進生諸功德，即為人也，文云「亦說無常苦空無我。」又兒長大能自行來，硬食尚消況復耎乳，譬功德稍著，堪可切磋彈斥對治，故文云「出世三味破世三味。」又兒長大委業示寶，此譬生善破惡已周，歸宗會極入第一義，故文云「應以寶藏付於善子。」推此經文須作四悉。就歡喜正他，文為五：一女人默念、二如來故問、三女人歎佛、四請法多少、五結其歡喜。舊四釋。一云：正說法時此女人來。二云：不爾，佛於爾時已年八十，呼女為姊，豈有老姊乳養嬰兒？蓋引昔事。三云：佛化為女，例如化童。四云：都無此女，假設寓言。從「世尊如是」去，是生善正他。舊用此語以合上譬。又云女人稱佛以為世尊，或云是佛自稱世尊。今將此文成前起後，若消不消即是成前，說無常等即是起後。文為三：初成前歡喜、次「亦說下」正是生善、三「若佛」下料簡不堪對治（云云）。「復告女人」去，是對治正他，文為二：先牒不堪；次明對治，以出世三味對破世三味。然醎酢苦是凡夫報味，無常苦無我是賢聖道味，凡聖合稱為世間三味。甜辛淡亦是凡夫報味，常樂我是出世道味，合稱出世三味。此別有意（云云）。「復告女人」去，是第一義正他，文為二：初以三悉即是惡子不付寶藏、後第一義名為善子即付寶藏。不付聲聞，故不以真諦為第一義。又取聲聞為生善者，既非獨大乘，此乃小大通共以為四悉。當知是家則為有佛者，佛是常義又是覺義，覺即解義。此人解常，故其家有佛。

Regarding rectifying others, the text has four parts: first, rectifying others through joy; second, rectifying others through non-self; third, rectifying others through permanence and bliss; fourth, rectifying others through the supreme truth. In the first passage, knowing, he deliberately asks. Causing you joy—is this not the mundane [siddhānta]? Subduing the worthy and noble with impermanence and non-self to make them generate roots of goodness—is this not the individual [siddhānta]? Supramundane permanence and bliss refuting worldly impermanence—is this not the therapeutic [siddhānta]? Entrusting the treasure to a good son when wishing to travel afar is the supreme truth [siddhānta]. Tracing the text to harmonize the meaning, the principle is exceedingly clear. In nursing an infant with milk, one may only let it taste butter; soft and hard food are both inadmissible. Rectifying others is also like this: from subtle to prominent, one rectifies them gradually. A woman being able to give birth exemplifies friendliness as the root of goodness. The infant exemplifies initial faith. Nursing with milk at birth exemplifies hearing the Dharma to nourish oneself. Tasting butter exemplifies praise and joy. Indulgent praise and beauty further worsen into sickness, hence it says, 'Giving the child too much butter, will it not shorten its life?' One must not give even too much butter, let alone hard or soft food! If joyful indulgence obstructs the Path, how much more so generating goodness and applying remedies; therefore one must deliberate. Tasting butter exemplifies the mundane [siddhānta], hence the text says, 'The Tathāgata speaks truly to make me joyful.' Furthermore, the woman's mind is suspicious that having too much butter prevents listening to the Dharma, so the Buddha explains it to enable her to focus her mind; this is the mark of rectifying others. Furthermore, when the infant is slightly older, milk is moderated and food is given; this exemplifies urging progress to generate various merits, which is the individual [siddhānta], the text saying, 'He also speaks of impermanence, suffering, emptiness, and non-self.' Furthermore, when the child grows older and can walk on his own, even hard food is digested, how much more so soft milk; this exemplifies merits becoming somewhat prominent, capable of enduring cutting, polishing, censure, and remedy, hence the text says, 'The supramundane three tastes break the worldly three tastes.' Furthermore, when the child is grown, entrusted with the estate and shown the treasure, this exemplifies generating goodness and breaking evil being complete, returning to the source and joining the ultimate to enter the supreme truth, hence the text says, 'One should entrust the treasure house to a good son.' Inferring from this sūtra text, one must apply the four siddhāntas. Regarding rectifying others through joy, the text has five parts: first, the woman's silent thought; second, the Tathāgata's deliberate inquiry; third, the woman praising the Buddha; fourth, asking whether the Dharma is little or much; fifth, concluding her joy. There are four traditional explanations. One says: while he was directly expounding the Dharma, this woman came. A second says: this is not so; the Buddha was already eighty years old at that time and addressed the woman as 'sister'; how could an elderly sister nurse an infant? It must cite a past event. A third says: the Buddha manifested as a woman, just like manifesting as a youth. A fourth says: there was no such woman at all; it is a hypothetical allegory. From 'the World-Honoured One is thus' onwards is rectifying others by generating goodness. Traditionally, these words were used to match the analogy above. It is also said that the woman addressed the Buddha as the World-Honoured One, or said that the Buddha called himself the World-Honoured One. Now, taking this text to conclude what preceded and introduce what follows: whether digested or not concludes what preceded; speaking of impermanence and so forth introduces what follows. The text has three parts: first, concluding the preceding joy; second, from 'also speaks' downwards is directly generating goodness; third, from 'if the Buddha' downwards examines those incapable of bearing the remedy (and so forth). From 'again told the woman' onwards is rectifying others through the therapeutic [siddhānta]; the text has two parts: first, restating incapability; second, explaining the remedy, using the supramundane three tastes to counter and break the worldly three tastes. Salty, sour, and bitter are the retributive tastes of ordinary beings; impermanence, suffering, and non-self are the tastes of the path of the worthy and noble; ordinary and noble together are called the worldly three tastes. Sweet, pungent, and bland are also the retributive tastes of ordinary beings; permanence, bliss, and self are the tastes of the supramundane path; together they are called the supramundane three tastes. This has a distinct meaning (and so forth). From 'again told the woman' onwards is rectifying others through the supreme truth; the text has two parts: first, taking the three siddhāntas as the bad son to whom the treasure house is not entrusted; later, the supreme truth is called the good son to whom the treasure house is immediately entrusted. Because it is not entrusted to śrāvakas, the ultimate truth is not taken as the supreme truth. Furthermore, taking śrāvakas as generating goodness, since it is not exclusively Mahāyāna, this is small and great shared in common to constitute the four siddhāntas. 'One should know that this family then has a Buddha': 'Buddha' has the meaning of permanence and also the meaning of awakening; awakening is the meaning of understanding. This person understands permanence, therefore his family has a Buddha.