金剛般若論會釋 1.49

1.49

The above has already explained the reasons for not speaking of that-portion and with-remainder [nirvāṇa]. To analyze it finely: because of delivering the three vehicles, it does not speak of causing them to attain great parinirvāṇa, non-abiding [nirvāṇa], the three distinct characteristics, inherent purity, and great bodhi. In the treatise, because the sūtra speaks of delivering beings through the generation of the great mind to attain what is common to the conversion of the three vehicles, it only excludes the two. Now, as with that remainder, it is attained in common by the three vehicles; the others are not nirvāṇa, and the treatise itself also says they are not ultimate. Fourth, concluding the explanation of the reasons for not speaking of the two nirvāṇas: first, citing the two nirvāṇas; next, concluding separately with four causes; and finally, concluding generally that therefore it speaks of without remainder. First, "because it is a fruit of virile power"; second, "because it is not an ultimate fruit"—namely the aforementioned fruit of habitual karma, for an ultimate fruit must be attained through the cause of applied effort; these two causes conclude the explanation of not speaking of expedient nirvāṇa. First, "because it is a common fruit"; second, "because it is not a definitive fruit"; these two causes conclude the explanation of not speaking of expedient and with-remainder nirvāṇa. Concluding generally: therefore, merely speaking of without remainder, there is no such fault; as for non-abiding and great parinirvāṇa, the Great Vehicle attains them, while beings of the determined lineage of the two vehicles cannot attain them at all, so neither are they vowed to be bestowed. However, the *Bodhisattvabhūmi* and fascicle 1 of the *Śīla-samāhita-sūtra*, at the stage of initially generating the mind, vow for great parinirvāṇa and great bodhi, which is completely different from this; here it is identical to the *Avataṃsaka-sūtra*, where at the stage of initially generating the mind one vows to attain without remainder. There are briefly three explanations: First, it is said that that is identical to what is spoken of here; because the Mahāyāna nirvāṇa without remainder is supreme, by implication it indicates that bodhi is also attained. Second, it is said that this is based on lineages: since not all attain buddhahood, they therefore attain without remainder; the intent of what is spoken of there is the wish and aspiration to become a buddha, which also does not conflict. Third, it is said that initially one does not yet understand, so there one vows for all to attain it; here, based on lineages, it does not speak of bodhi. Because these are all making vows, they are omitted and not questioned; nor does one vow to attain inherently pure nirvāṇa, because that is already established from the beginning and does not need to be questioned or spoken of; therefore it merely excludes the two.