淨名玄論 3.37

3.37

問：若不斷煩惱如不除空華者，經有四句：一斷煩惱，如《大品》云「一念相應慧，斷煩惱及習」。二不斷煩惱，如此經云「不斷煩惱而入涅槃」。三亦斷亦不斷，如《涅槃經》云「一切眾生，不破煩惱亦不與俱」。既有四文，云何偏用。又四句相害，請為會通。答：為緣故異，而大意猶同。佛為增上慢，未斷煩惱自謂得聖，故說斷煩惱也。為二乘人言，有煩惱可斷，故言不斷耳。欲明中道義，故說亦斷亦不斷。如佛告梵王：「今說中道，一切眾生不能破結」，明離其有邊，非不能破。辨離其無邊，欲雙斥凡聖二見，明非斷非俱，非俱故不同凡、非斷故不同聖，故來意異也。所言大意同者，雖有四句，只是一句耳。知煩惱本自不生、今亦無滅，故無所斷。以能如此了悟，故煩惱不復現前，則名為斷。故不斷即是斷，實無所斷，云何破之？而惑不現前，云何不破？以無所破。是故不斷而無惑現前，云何與俱？是以四句猶一句耳。又此經所興明解脫者，正明釋迦一期出世，大小凡聖有所得人諸縛悉令得解脫。原如來出世，赴緣施教，本令悟不凡不聖、不大不小不二法門。而有凡聖大小者，皆是非凡非聖、非大非小，故能凡能聖能大能小耳。雖有凡聖，不動無凡聖，大小亦然。但稟教之徒，聞凡作凡解、聞聖作聖解、大小亦然、故並成有所得、悉繫屬於魔、非佛弟子。是知如來命文殊於異方、召維摩於他土，爰集毘耶共弘斯教。先以三品破凡夫二乘菩薩三病，令悟不凡不聖、不大不小，以解脫此三病，故云解脫。次論能化解脫者，上已辨一義，今更說異門。淨名於染不染，不為染縛；處淨非淨，不為淨縛；雙遊染淨，不為非染淨縛。實無所行，不為染淨所縛，是故名為解脫。染淨既爾，萬義類然。

Question: If not severing afflictions is like not removing flowers in the sky, the sūtras have four positions: First, severing afflictions, as the Larger Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra says, "Wisdom corresponding in a single thought severs afflictions and their residual habits." Second, not severing afflictions, as this sūtra says, "Entering nirvāṇa without severing afflictions." Third, both severing and not severing, as the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says, "All sentient beings neither destroy afflictions nor are accompanied by them." Since there are four passages, why use only one? Moreover, the four positions contradict each other; please harmonize and resolve them.
Answer: They differ on account of conditions, yet their great meaning remains identical. For those of overweening pride who have not severed afflictions yet claim to have attained sagehood, the Buddha spoke of severing afflictions. For people of the two vehicles who say there are afflictions that can be severed, he said they are not severed. Wishing to clarify the meaning of the middle way, he spoke of both severing and not severing. Just as the Buddha told the Brahmā King: "Now I speak of the middle way: all sentient beings cannot destroy the fetters"—clarifying departure from the extreme of existence; "yet it is not that they cannot destroy them"—discerning departure from the extreme of nonexistence. Wishing to repudiate both the views of the ordinary person and the sage, he clarified neither severing nor accompanying: because of not accompanying, they are not identical to ordinary persons; because of not severing, they are not identical to sages. Thus the reasons for their delivery differ. As for saying that the great meaning is identical: although there are four positions, they are only one position. Knowing that afflictions originally do not arise and now do not cease, there is nothing to sever. Because one can awaken like this, afflictions no longer appear before one, and this is called severing. Thus, non-severing is itself severing; truly there is nothing severed, so how could one destroy them? Yet delusion does not appear before one, so how is it not destroyed? Because there is nothing to destroy, it is non-severing, yet with no delusion appearing before one, how could one be accompanied by them? Therefore, the four positions are still one position. Furthermore, the reason this sūtra arose to clarify liberation is precisely to clarify that during Śākyamuni's single lifetime in the world, he caused all those of the great and small, ordinary and holy, who have attainments, to attain liberation from all bondages. Originally, the Tathāgata appeared in the world to accord with conditions and confer teachings, fundamentally intending to cause them to awaken to the Dharma gate of nonduality that is neither ordinary nor holy, neither great nor small. That there are ordinary and holy, great and small, is entirely because being neither ordinary nor holy, neither great nor small, he can therefore be ordinary, be holy, be great, and be small. Although there are ordinary and holy, the absence of ordinary and holy remains unmoved; the great and small are also like this. But those who receive the teachings, hearing of the ordinary, form ordinary understandings; hearing of the holy, form holy understandings; great and small are also like this. Thus they all come to have attainments, completely belong to Māra, and are not disciples of the Buddha. Therefore we know that the Tathāgata commanded Mañjuśrī from a different region and summoned Vimalakīrti from another land, gathering in Vaiśālī to jointly propagate this teaching. First, by means of three chapters, he demolished the three sicknesses of ordinary persons, the two vehicles, and bodhisattvas, causing them to awaken to being neither ordinary nor holy, neither great nor small, in order to liberate them from these three sicknesses; hence it is called liberation. Next, in discussing the liberation of the transformer [Vimalakīrti]: above, one meaning has already been discerned; now another gate is further explained. Vimalakīrti, regarding defilement, is not defiled, and is not bound by defilement; dwelling in purity, it is not purity, and he is not bound by purity; traversing both defilement and purity, he is not bound by non-defilement and non-purity. Truly having no practice, he is not bound by defilement or purity; therefore this is called liberation. Defilement and purity being thus, the myriad meanings are all of this kind.