大般涅槃經疏 16.7

16.7

From "If it is impermanent, then it is suffering" below, secondly, generally refutes the previous five iterations reckoning pleasure and three iterations reckoning purity. This also has two parts: first, directly refuting; later, pointing out that it was already answered above. "If it is impermanent, then it is suffering" refutes their reckoning of pleasure. "If it is suffering, then it is impure" refutes their reckoning of purity. As for its already having been answered due to Kāśyapa's question above, there are three explanations. First, Kāishàn says: In the previous holy conduct of the wisdom of the four truths, at the outset of explaining the truth of suffering, it explained that the five aggregates are all suffering. Kāśyapa then posed various objections, explaining that since there are conditions for pleasure and causes of pleasure, there should in principle be pleasure and they should not all be suffering. The Buddha answered below that they errantly produce the conception of pleasure amidst suffering, which was already answering it. Second, Yěchéng says: In the previous "Nature Chapter," the Buddha has the nature of the true self; Kāśyapa then raised twelve objections demanding to find its present function, and the Buddha answered it by citing metaphors such as the wrestler's forehead pearl. Third, most masters use the end of the "Longevity Chapter," where Kāśyapa asked: In the world it is also said that Brahmā is permanent; how does this differ from what the Buddha says? The Buddha answered that the non-Buddhists all stole these words, like the metaphor of stealing the cow; therefore it says it was already answered. In the Héxī Records, it says: That is, it was already answered in the seventh fascicle. Master Guān says: In the "Four Inversions Chapter" it fully explained inversions such as purity and pleasure; here it is no longer detailed, but merely refutes pleasure and purity in brief; hence it points to what came above.