大乘義章 18.13

18.13

次明三事有成涅槃不成涅槃。於中初先大小相對明成不成，後偏就大明成不成。大小相對者，大乘三事得成涅槃，小乘不成。何故如是？釋有五義：一有無分別。小乘三事體是有法，小乘涅槃體是無法，有無別體故不相成。大乘三事體是有法，大乘涅槃亦是有法，有義相扶故得相成。二常無常相對分別。小乘事體是無常，小乘涅槃體是其常，常無常異故不相成。大乘三事體性是常，大乘涅槃體亦是常，常義相順故得相成。此前兩門，義有文無。第三同體異體分別。小乘三事體性各別，所以不成。體云何別？小乘法中宣說慧數以為般若，解脫之數名為解脫，自餘諸德名為法身。此等心法體性各別，以體別故守性不寂，性不寂故不成涅槃。大乘三事同體義分，其猶虛空無礙不動，以同體故緣起相成，無有一法別守自性，無別性故德體寂滅，以體寂故得成涅槃。故《涅槃》云「又非別異故成涅槃。」四並不並相對分別。小乘三事，心心數法同時別體，別體並故不成涅槃。大乘三事，同時同體同一真心，隨義以分，以同體故不名為並，以不並故得成涅槃。故《涅槃》云「如世伊字三點，若並則不得成，不並乃成，涅槃如是。」五縱不縱相對分別。小乘三事，性雖同時用有先後，名之為縱。別體而縱，不成涅槃。大乘三事，同體同時用無先後，所以非縱，以非縱故得成涅槃。故《涅槃》云「如世伊字三點，若縱則不得成，非縱乃成，涅槃如是。」此後三義涅槃如是此後三義涅槃具辨。大小相對，辨之略爾。次就大乘明成不成。別有四義：一真妄分別。直就大中，緣修三事體妄不真，不成涅槃；真德三事乃成涅槃。於此門中，但令是真，莫問性淨方便應化，悉成涅槃。二真應分別。直就向前真德之中有真有應，應化三事相同小乘，無常遷變不成涅槃，以不成故終須息滅。真德三事方成涅槃，以真成故終須入中。故經說言「我今安住如是三法，名入涅槃。」三性淨方便相對分別。如《涅槃》說「方便三事悉是菩提，性淨三事悉名涅槃。」方便三事是菩提故，不成涅槃。故《涅槃》云「如來之身亦非涅槃，解脫之法亦非涅槃，摩訶般若亦非涅槃。性淨三事是涅槃故，得成涅槃。」四就性淨三事之中，總別則不成，總收則成。如世伊字三點，別分則不成伊，三點合聚乃得成伊。此亦如是，別分事隔，所以不成，總攝圓具，所以得成。成不成義，辨之云爾（此四門竟）。

Next, explaining whether the three factors constitute nirvāṇa or do not constitute nirvāṇa. Within this, first the constitution or non-constitution is explained by contrasting Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna; thereafter, the constitution or non-constitution is explained exclusively with respect to the Mahāyāna. Contrasting Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna: the three factors of the Mahāyāna can constitute nirvāṇa, whereas those of the Hīnayāna do not constitute it. Why is this so? The explanation has five meanings: First, the distinction between existence and non-existence. The substance of the three factors in the Hīnayāna is an existent dharma, whereas the substance of nirvāṇa in the Hīnayāna is a non-existent dharma; because existence and non-existence have distinct substances, they do not constitute one another. The substance of the three factors in the Mahāyāna is an existent dharma, and nirvāṇa in the Mahāyāna is also an existent dharma; because the senses of existence support one another, they can constitute one another. Second, the distinction by contrasting permanence and impermanence. The substance of the factors in the Hīnayāna is impermanent, whereas the substance of nirvāṇa in the Hīnayāna is permanent; because permanence and impermanence are different, they do not constitute one another. The essential nature of the three factors in the Mahāyāna is permanent, and the substance of nirvāṇa in the Mahāyāna is also permanent; because the senses of permanence correspond with one another, they can constitute one another. In these previous two perspectives, the meaning is present though the scriptural passage is absent. Third, the distinction between identical substance and different substances. In the Hīnayāna, the essential natures of the three factors are distinct, and therefore they do not constitute [nirvāṇa]. How are their substances distinct? Within Hīnayāna teachings, it is taught that the mental factor (caitta) of wisdom is prajñā, the mental factor of liberation is vimukti, and all remaining virtues are the dharmakāya. The essential natures of these mental dharmas are individually distinct; because their substances are distinct, they adhere to their own natures and are not quiescent, and because their natures are not quiescent, they do not constitute nirvāṇa. In the Mahāyāna, the three factors share an identical substance and are distinguished by meaning, just as space is unobstructed and immovable; because they share an identical substance, dependent arising constitutes them with one another, and not a single dharma clings separately to its own self-nature; because there is no separate nature, the substance of virtues is quiescent and extinguished; and because its substance is quiescent, it can constitute nirvāṇa. Hence the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says: "Furthermore, because they are not distinct, it constitutes nirvāṇa." Fourth, the distinction by contrasting side-by-side juxtaposition and non-juxtaposition. In the Hīnayāna, the three factors are mind and mental factors occurring at the same time with distinct substances; because distinct substances are juxtaposed side-by-side, they do not constitute nirvāṇa. In the Mahāyāna, the three factors are simultaneous, of the same substance, and of the single true consciousness, distinguished according to meaning; because they are of the same substance, they are not called juxtaposed side-by-side, and because they are not juxtaposed, they can constitute nirvāṇa. Hence the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says: "Like the three dots of the worldly letter 'I': if they are placed side by side, it does not constitute it; only when not side by side does it constitute it; nirvāṇa is also like this." Fifth, the distinction by contrasting vertical succession and non-succession. In the Hīnayāna, although the natures of the three factors are simultaneous, their functions have anteriority and posteriority, which is called 'vertical'; being of distinct substances and vertical, they do not constitute nirvāṇa. In the Mahāyāna, the three factors are of the same substance and simultaneous, and their functions have no anteriority and posteriority, and therefore are not vertical; because they are not vertical, they can constitute nirvāṇa. Hence the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says: "Like the three dots of the worldly letter 'I': if they are vertical, it does not constitute it; only when not vertical does it constitute it; nirvāṇa is also like this." These latter three meanings are fully analyzed in the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra]. The contrast between Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna is briefly analyzed as such. Next, explaining constitution and non-constitution with respect to the Mahāyāna. There are four distinct meanings: First, the distinction between the true and the false. Directly within the Mahāyāna, the substance of the three factors of cultivation through conditions is false and not true, and does not constitute nirvāṇa; only the three factors of true virtue constitute nirvāṇa. In this perspective, as long as it is true, without asking whether it is naturally pure, skillful means, or responsive transformation, all constitute nirvāṇa. Second, the distinction between the true and the responsive. Directly within the aforementioned true virtues, there are the true and the responsive; the three factors of responsive transformation are similar to the Hīnayāna, changing and impermanent, and do not constitute nirvāṇa; because they do not constitute it, they must ultimately cease. Only the three factors of true virtue constitute nirvāṇa; because they are truly constituted, one must ultimately enter into them. Hence the sūtra says: "I now abide peacefully in these three dharmas, which is called entering nirvāṇa." Third, the distinction by contrasting natural purity and skillful means. As the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says: "The three factors of skillful means are all bodhi; the three factors of natural purity are all called nirvāṇa." Because the three factors of skillful means are bodhi, they do not constitute nirvāṇa. Hence the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says: "The body of the Tathāgata is also not nirvāṇa; the dharma of liberation is also not nirvāṇa; mahāprajñā is also not nirvāṇa. Because the three factors of natural purity are nirvāṇa, they can constitute nirvāṇa." Fourth, within the three factors of natural purity, if taken separately they do not constitute [nirvāṇa], but if gathered together they do constitute it. Just as with the three dots of the worldly letter 'I', if separated they do not form the letter 'I', but when the three dots are brought together they form the letter 'I'. This is also like that: if separated, the factors are isolated from one another and thus do not constitute it; when comprehended as a whole, they are complete and fulfilled, and thus can constitute it. The meaning of constituting and not constituting is analyzed as such (this completes the fourth gate).