大般涅槃經疏 9.24

9.24

「迦葉復言」去，第二論義，有兩問答。此中論義牒前燈滅，譬滅已永不復生，何得無方楞嚴示現？將前意難後義。答文為三：初訶其問、二舉譬答、三反責迦葉奉答因以為難。佛答，文四：一訶問、二定宗、三會譬、四料簡。初二如文。三會燈滅，云是羅漢涅槃，永滅不生；如來涅槃，滅而不滅、無生而生（云云）。「若更」下，四料簡。中云那含不受生者，一云不受欲界生，大乘那含不受二邊生也。

From "Kāśyapa spoke again" onward is the second [section], discussing the doctrine, which contains two exchanges of question and answer. In this doctrinal discussion, he quotes the earlier simile of the lamp being extinguished, which illustrates that once extinguished it is never born again, [asking] how there could be the non-localized manifestation of the śūraṅgama[-samādhi]. He takes the earlier idea to challenge the later doctrine. The text of the response has three parts: first, reproving his question; second, responding by adducing similes; third, turning around to reproach Kāśyapa for taking the answer respectfully received as a basis for raising difficulties. The Buddha's response has four parts: first, reproving the question; second, determining the central tenet; third, reconciling the simile; fourth, critical discrimination. The first two are as in the text. Third, reconciling the lamp being extinguished: he says that this is the nirvāṇa of the arhat, which is eternally extinguished and not reborn; the nirvāṇa of the Tathāgata is extinguished yet unextinguished, unborn yet born (and so forth). From "If further" below is the fourth, the critical discrimination. In it, the statement that an anāgāmin does not undergo rebirth means, according to one explanation, that he does not undergo rebirth in the desire realm; according to the Mahāyāna, the anāgāmin does not undergo rebirth in the two extremes.