肇論疏 3.39

3.39

《史記》云：言論相拒謂之難。今難三乘三位兩種差別，故云難差也。有名曰涅槃既絕圖度下，領前言也。斯則窮理盡性下，窮盡至理、究竟物性也。理其然矣，謂其理實然，無有差別也。而放光云三乘諸道，《大品經》文也。《金剛般若》亦云爾也。佛言昔我為菩薩名曰儒僮於燃燈佛所已入涅槃，儒僮之名，諸經散說。已入涅槃，是《法華》文。彼云：於此時間我說燃燈佛等，又復言其入於涅槃。今所引者，義意與《法華》有別。《法華》燃燈佛涅槃，今引言儒僮涅槃，恐是舊經，翻譯有異也。於七住初獲無生忍，關河大德凡言住者，皆是地也。儒僮菩薩見燃燈時，位當七地，得無生忍也。進修三位者，謂八九十三地也。若涅槃一也則不應有三下，雙難前三乘之三及三位之三也。如其有三則非究竟者，若有三乘、若有三位，明知未究竟。之道下，既云究竟，何有昇降之殊？昇謂高昇，降謂降下也。眾經異說下，諸經各說不同，何為耶中正耶？

The Shiji states: "Disputing one another's theses is called nan (objection)." Here he objects to the two kinds of distinctions—namely, the three vehicles and the three stages; hence it is called "Objecting to Distinctions." From "The Named One says: Nirvāṇa is already beyond conceptual calculation" downward, he takes up the preceding words. From "This then exhausts the principle and plumbs nature" downward, it means exhausting the ultimate principle and penetrating to the utmost the nature of things. "The principle is indeed so" means that its principle is truly thus, without distinction. "Yet the Fangguang says that there are the various paths of the three vehicles" is a text from the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā. The Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā also says this. "The Buddha said: In the past, when I was a bodhisattva named Mānava, I had already entered nirvāṇa at the place of Dīpaṃkara Buddha." The name Mānava is mentioned scattered across various sūtras. "Had already entered nirvāṇa" is a text from the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka. It says there: "At that time I spoke of Dīpaṃkara Buddha and others, and furthermore said that they had entered into nirvāṇa." What is cited here differs in meaning and intent from the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka. In the Saddharmapuṇḍarīka it is Dīpaṃkara Buddha who entered nirvāṇa, whereas what is cited here says that Mānava entered nirvāṇa; this is probably from an older sūtra, where the translation differed. "At the seventh stage, he initially attained the tolerance of non-arising": whenever the Great Virtues of the Guanhe region spoke of a "stage" (zhu), they all meant a bhūmi (di). When the bodhisattva Mānava saw Dīpaṃkara, his status corresponded to the seventh bhūmi, and he attained the tolerance of non-arising. "Advancing in cultivation through three stages" refers to the eighth, ninth, and tenth bhūmis. From "If nirvāṇa is one, then there should not be three" downward, he doubly objects to both the triad of the three vehicles and the triad of the three stages mentioned previously. "If there are three, then it is not ultimate" means: if there are three vehicles or if there are three stages, one clearly knows it is not yet ultimate. Downward from "of the path": since it is said to be ultimate, how could there be a difference of ascending and descending? "Ascending" means rising high; "descending" means going downward. From "The various sūtras speak differently" downward: the various sūtras each say different things; which is correct?