大般涅槃經疏 9.26

9.26

從此卷初是第三開意密明解脫德。文為二：初明開密、次明解脫。他解開意密，興皇云：開身密未盡，今明通開三業之密。文云「如來之言開發顯露」，豈非開口密？「如來心無慳吝」，豈非開意密？「如來法身具足無缺」，豈非開身密？經有通文，不須偏說。何者？佛示凡像說半字法隨他所宜，方便三業覆真三業，愚者不了名之為藏。今開方便即是真實，智者了達無所祕藏，是約三業開密。又約四句開密，謂他開佛密、佛開他密、佛開佛密、他開他密。他開佛密者，品初迦葉云佛法不爾，咸令眾生悉得知見。知即開意密，見即開身口兩密（云云）。佛開他密者，示諸眾生諸覺寶藏，顯發額珠置祕藏中，是開他密。佛開佛密者，我從得道常說般若法身解脫。我今此身及諸色像即是法身，若子長大有堪任力，如來則無慳吝之心，是佛開佛密義也。他開他密者，如德王云：「我解一句半句。以解一句至半句故，見少佛性。如佛所說，我亦當得入大涅槃（云云）。」又十二句開密，謂四句中各開三業，則十二句開密（云云）。又無開無覆、無顯無密。何者？佛性之理未曾是開，其誰為覆？既無開覆，寧有顯密？一句叵得則無眾多。特以眾生聞不能解名之為密，智者了達則無復顯密。無顯密故名之為開，無開而開如前分別。問：《釋論》云「般若是顯示，法華是祕密。」舊解此云：般若大道無住之說而為顯示，法華斥小以為祕密。祕密不了，顯示則了。此義不然。法性非顯非密，為緣顯密，經經悉爾，豈可以龍樹別意通害諸經？此文亦以無常斥常，豈是不了？故前開密此說解脫者，兩義相關。何者？若定開定覆，為開覆所局，不名解脫。非開非覆、能開能覆，開覆自在方是解脫。故此兩文並屬解脫德攝。

From the beginning of this fascicle onward is the third [part], disclosing the secret of the mind to clarify the virtue of liberation. The text has two parts: first, clarifying the disclosure of the secret; next, clarifying liberation. In others' explanations of disclosing the secret of the mind, [Master] Xīnghuáng says: The disclosure of the secret of the body was not yet complete, so now it is clarified as comprehensively disclosing the secrets of the three karmas. The text states: "The words of the Tathāgata are uncovered, disclosed, and exposed"—is this not disclosing the secret of speech? "The mind of the Tathāgata is free from stinginess"—is this not disclosing the secret of the mind? "The Dharma-body of the Tathāgata is complete and without deficiency"—is this not disclosing the secret of the body? Since the sūtra has comprehensive text, one should not explain it one-sidedly. Why is this? The Buddha manifests a common appearance and speaks the half-letter Dharma according to what is suitable for others; the provisional three karmas conceal the real three karmas, and the foolish, failing to understand, call it a treasury. Now disclosing the provisional as precisely the real, the wise thoroughly comprehend that there is nothing kept secret and stored away: this is disclosing the secret in terms of the three karmas. Furthermore, the secret is disclosed in terms of four propositions: namely, others disclose the Buddha's secret; the Buddha discloses others' secret; the Buddha discloses the Buddha's secret; and others disclose others' secret. "Others disclose the Buddha's secret": at the beginning of the chapter, Kāśyapa says that the Buddha's Dharma is not like that, but causes all sentient beings to fully know and see. "Knowing" is disclosing the secret of the mind; "seeing" is disclosing the two secrets of body and speech (and so forth). "The Buddha discloses others' secret": he displays to all sentient beings the treasure store of all awakenings, and reveals the forehead jewel placed in the secret treasury—this is disclosing others' secret. "The Buddha discloses the Buddha's secret": "Ever since I attained the Way, I have constantly spoken of prajñā, the Dharma-body, and liberation. This present body and all forms of mine are precisely the Dharma-body; if the son is grown up and has sufficient capability, the Tathāgata has no mind of stinginess"—this is the meaning of the Buddha disclosing the Buddha's secret. "Others disclose others' secret": as King of Virtue says, "I understand one phrase or half a phrase. Because I understand one phrase or half a phrase, I see a little of the buddhadhātu. As the Buddha has said, I too shall attain entry into great nirvāṇa" (and so forth). Furthermore, disclosing the secret in terms of twelve propositions means that within each of the four propositions, each of the three karmas is disclosed, thus yielding twelve propositions for disclosing the secret (and so forth). Furthermore, there is neither disclosing nor concealing, neither revealing nor keeping secret. Why is this? The principle of the buddhadhātu has never been disclosed; who then would conceal it? Since there is neither disclosing nor concealing, how could there be revealing or keeping secret? When not a single phrase can be apprehended, there are no multitudes [of propositions]. It is merely because sentient beings hear but cannot understand that it is called secret; when the wise thoroughly comprehend it, then there is no longer revealing or secret. Because there is neither revealing nor secret, it is called disclosing; disclosing without disclosing is as distinguished above. Question: The Treatise [on the Great Prajñāpāramitā] states: "Prajñā is explicit disclosure, the Lotus Sūtra is secret." The old explanation of this says: the teaching of non-abiding in the great path of prajñā is explicit disclosure; the Lotus Sūtra's rebuking of the Hinayāna is secret. The secret is provisional, while explicit disclosure is definitive. This meaning is not so. Dharmatā is neither explicit nor secret; it is explicit or secret according to conditions. Every sūtra is like this; how could Nāgārjuna's specific intent be universally applied to undermine all sūtras? This text also rebukes the permanent with the impermanent—could it be non-definitive? Therefore, the earlier disclosure of the secret and this explanation of liberation are interrelated in their two meanings. Why is this? If it were definitively disclosing or definitively concealing, one would be confined by disclosing and concealing, and it would not be called liberation. Being neither disclosing nor concealing, yet able to disclose and able to conceal, with unconstrained mastery in disclosing and concealing—only this is liberation. Therefore, both passages are subsumed under the virtue of liberation.