淨名經關中釋抄 2.4.4

2.4.4

生死涅槃俱假名。 故下文云。 我及涅槃此二皆空。 以何為空。 但以名自故空　出淤泥者。 凡夫以五欲為淤泥。 二乘以取證為淤泥　四取者即四受也。 又云。 不受三界及涅槃也　阿難此云歡喜。 佛得道夜復生阿難。 歡喜生故父王名之也。 復次宿世善根見者歡喜故名也　勿謗如來者。 小乘謂佛是業生身現身成道。 大乘以悟身本無身為法身應物現身為跡身。 是即應物為疾非實疾也。 今執為實業所招。 豈非謗歟。 諸教云金槍馬麥等言例同斯解。 即是法身者。 小乘以丈六為生死身。 五分法為法身。 大乘以即色豈空。 丈六即真。 真即法性常住。 非思業生。 即陰即空及過三界。 空即清淨。 何漏為有。 四相流動。 生滅無性。 即遷非遷。 故曰無為　諸數者有為四相數也。 遠云。 非思欲者斷煩惱障。 過三界者離分段果。 無漏者破所知障。 無為者離變易果。 崇福云。 非思欲者非思業生。 生自在故。 是我過三界者。 三界是苦。 過三界苦即是樂也。 無漏者。 有漏之垢。 無漏即淨也。 無為者。 有為法無常。 佛身無為即是常也　如居士言者。 佛身真常如前所辨。 此顯實也。 不生五濁現病利物。 此開權也不言不現執病身為實聞病是應明身非我。 有此開權也。 然身非我有。 即為物故有。 為物有身。 即身非身。 為法身也。 此亦顯實矣。 經文若此。 理亦皎然。 而惑者乃謂至法花方云開權顯實。 到涅槃始辯當身法身者。 不亦謬見經文乎。 又法花亦云為五濁故開一乘為三乘。 此經亦為五濁故示法身為疾身。 知三是偽與了病是應何殊。 悟三即一與覺應即真何別。 又大經亦云。 吾今此身即是常身法身。 此經亦云。 佛身者即法身也。 又云。 佛身無為不墮諸數。 豈可離此丈六而辯無為哉。 而滯教失旨之徒至法花執一定一謂諸經不一。 到涅槃報佛是常即言諸教未常。 豈有不二法門而非一實相般若而非常。 是知窮原造極。 理不可殊。 隨根互顯教不可一。 名教無定明理本無名。 無名之名曷可執名而封見矣。

Birth-and-death and nirvāṇa are both provisional names. Therefore the lower text states, 'I and nirvāṇa—both of these are empty.' In what way are they empty? They are empty merely because they are names. Regarding 'emerging from the mire': ordinary people take the five desires as the mire; the two vehicles take grasping at realization as the mire. 'The four graspings' are the four clingings. It is also said that they mean not clinging to the triple realm or to nirvāṇa. 'Ānanda' here is translated as 'Joy'. On the night the Buddha attained the Way, Ānanda was born; because joy arose, his royal father named him thus. Furthermore, because of roots of goodness in past lives, those who saw him rejoiced; hence the name. Regarding 'do not slander the Tathāgata': the Lesser Vehicle claims that the Buddha has a body born of karma, which achieved the Way in this present body. The Great Vehicle takes awakening to the fact that the body is originally without a body as the dharmakāya, and manifesting a body in response to beings as the trace body. That is, manifesting sickness in response to beings is not actual sickness. Now grasping at it as incurred by actual karma—is that not slandering? What the various teachings say about the golden spear, the horse barley, and the like is explained by analogy with this. Regarding 'that is the dharmakāya': the Lesser Vehicle takes the sixteen-foot body as the body of birth and death, and the fivefold Dharma body as the dharmakāya. The Great Vehicle takes form as not separate from emptiness; the sixteen-foot body is the real itself. The real is the permanently abiding Dharma-nature, not born of volitional karma. To be identical with the aggregates is to be identical with emptiness and to transcend the triple realm. Emptiness is purity; what contamination could exist? The four marks flow and move; arising and ceasing have no self-nature; being identical with shifting is being non-shifting; hence it is called unconditioned. 'The categories' are the categories of the four marks of the conditioned. [Master Hui]yuan said: 'Not [born of] desire and thought' means severing the obstacle of afflictions. 'Transcending the triple realm' means leaving behind the retribution of portion and limitation. 'Uncontaminated' means breaking through the obstacle to the known. 'Unconditioned' means leaving behind the retribution of change. Chongfu said: 'Not born of desire and thought' means not born of volitional karma, because birth is sovereign; this is the self. 'Transcending the triple realm': the triple realm is suffering; transcending the suffering of the triple realm is bliss. 'Uncontaminated': the defilement of the contaminated; uncontaminated is purity. 'Unconditioned': conditioned dharmas are impermanent; the Buddha's body being unconditioned is permanence. Regarding 'as the layman says': the Buddha's body is truly permanent as analyzed above; this reveals the ultimate. Not being born into the five turbidities yet manifesting sickness to benefit beings: this opens the provisional. Not speaking and not manifesting leads to grasping at the sick body as real; hearing that sickness is a response clarifies that the body is not 'I'—thus there is this opening of the provisional. Yet if the body is not my own, it exists solely for the sake of beings; having a body for the sake of beings, the body is not a [mere] body, but is the dharmakāya. This also reveals the ultimate. The sūtra text being like this, the principle is also crystal clear. Yet those who are confused go so far as to say that only when reaching the Lotus Sūtra does one speak of opening the provisional and revealing the ultimate, and only upon arriving at the Nirvāṇa Sūtra does one begin to distinguish the present body as the dharmakāya—is this not a mistaken view of the sūtra texts? Furthermore, the Lotus Sūtra also states that for the sake of the five turbidities it opens the One Vehicle into the three vehicles; this sūtra also, for the sake of the five turbidities, displays the dharmakāya as a sick body. What difference is there between knowing the three to be provisional and understanding the sickness to be a response? What difference is there between awakening to the three as the one and realizing the response to be the real? Furthermore, the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra also states, 'My present body is the permanent body, the dharmakāya.' This sūtra also states, 'The Buddha's body is the dharmakāya.' It also states, 'The Buddha's body is unconditioned and does not fall into categories.' How could one distinguish the unconditioned apart from this sixteen-foot body? Yet those who cling to the teachings and miss the intent, when reaching the Lotus Sūtra, grasp at the one and fix upon the one, saying other sūtras are not the one; arriving at the Nirvāṇa Sūtra, [hearing that] the retribution Buddha is permanent, they immediately say other teachings are not permanent. How could the non-dual Dharma gate not be the one, and true-mark prajñā not be permanent? Thus we know that when tracing the origin and reaching the ultimate, the principle cannot be different. According to capacities, they mutually illuminate; the teachings cannot be single. Names and teachings are not fixed; the bright principle originally has no name. As for the name of the nameless, how could one cling to the name and confine one's view?