大涅槃經義記卷第四
Commentary on the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, Volume 4
性若三世攝是無常也。第四從若斷善根有佛性者已下。執定有定無為問。從為眾生故有四種答已下。先明昔日四答所以明者。一為明由昔顯今。二為明今異於昔也。從如來十力無畏已下。訖六少見名分別答。此將答第一問。先舉緣正於前。如汝先問者。此稱第一問而答。答意斷善根人實當有彼如來後身二種佛性。但現在邪見隔障因緣是以無也。如來佛性非過去已下。答第三問明正因是常非三世也。後身佛性現在未來已下。答第二問。就中恒兼答第三問。向所以在前。答第三問者為明正因非三世。後身二世九住以前三世增一明義故也。後身二世者。取初能見之心以為現在。自後見心束作諦。未來未得菩提時。佛性因故三世攝者。初住以前有漏位中。是不善五陰佛性因故三世所攝果則不爾。有三世非三世者。初地以上訖於十地。此善五陰。是不善五陰果體無常故三世所攝。佛果五陰是善五陰。果體常住故非三世攝。十地已下訖於六住明佛因故。過去現在未來果亦如是者義亦同然。五住至初住□□□□□□□故。過去現在未來果亦如是耳。以義同前故□□□□□□□□性六種七種。此□□中明上緣正闡提當有也。若□□□□□□□第四問也。我亦不說者。亦不偏說置而不說名置答也。亦有說置妄計名為置答也。云何名因。過去現在未來者。將欲配屬於人。是故發問。又云上來廣明因果三世非三世。今問意因所以三世果所以有三世非三世也。答意因是不善五陰是以三世攝。果有不善五陰果有善五陰果是以有三世有三世也。自下廣明三世非三世緣之別。一切無明已下凡有三段。廣釋緣因為世攝正因不為世攝。初一段直就道理廣明緣因為三世攝。正因不為世攝□□□□於已下。第二引其成經明于緣正攝以不攝。須陀洹人已下。第三就人以明緣正攝以不攝。聲聞如乳者。上如來為成增一明義故。是以從佛向下而明。此中為成前微後著。是以從下向上而明也。十住下品為辟支。上品為菩薩。五六七種未來有者。復明何義。上來但明緣正二種佛性明生善。自下始明生善義也。未來業未業生終不生果者。為明未來佛性必有。是以能生現在之善不同未來業也。又云此未來業以未有故。不能生果。現有下品因未來必生中品之業。未來有時必得生果故。名為有佛性。亦以未有故不名現有。以畢有故名為當有。由當有故感生現善也。因上未來之業。以未生故終不生果。即執作難未來佛性即時未有。云何生善下。以二喻喻有生義也。若言五陰是佛性者。此下還復宗廣明佛性。非有非無中道之理。重答上第四問。明非定有非定無也。自下將明生善。先執或以明中道。以是生善之本故也。執現有陰為性。而問但執舉一執耳。其實廣發眾疑也。執緣為正故言失意眾生不解。即是中道者明不解故。現無佛性。是非有或時有解明佛性非是都無非有非無為中道也。我為眾生得開解者。執內外有無皆不開解。下明非內非外虛空兔角以下。就六種喻明非有非無。令得生解為開解也。熱病服乳者。解云。外國乳冷酪熱是以服乳除其熱病。但服之太過故生冷病。服酪能除冷病。但服之太過反生熱病。若順此方乳熱酪冷者。而言熱病服乳者此當以熱治熱。下病服酪者以冷治。冷乳生冷病者。此明其乳非直能治熱病生則亦能治冷病也。下言酪生熱病者義亦如之。若言五味先有待緣而發。如內大先有待外大增者義不得然。何故不然。五味前後次第說故。不從多方使。但從二緣乳中得酪生蘇。乃至醍醐。一切諸法皆不如是。但從二緣得也。非方便得者非正。從二方便能得。乃從五緣得也。能增□內外四大者亦復如是者。皆是本無從緣生也。又云取計而破外人計乳因之中。先有酪果不由方便。始得生酪。佛性亦爾。身中先有。不由緣得者。是妄計耳。就我正義生蘇等皆不如是者。皆不先有非方便得明其本無從方便得也。四大佛性皆亦如是要侍緣也。如我所說十二部經已下至一向作解。此明偏執為病。勸信中道而生善也。又復為明昔經隨自意語說無常法。猶可從之生解。況今隨自意語解說佛性何得不生解。乃至闡提佛性有無亦如是者。明闡提當成佛時佛性有無同如現佛有無一不異也。亦云闡提現在有惡名有無善為無也。昔共彌勒論于性空。望今是世諦但空理幽玄故。身子等不能生解。而所以須菩提等能為諸大士說者如來加感故也。於性空世諦猶尚不解。況佛性第一。而乃率已一向取解不隨佛語也。又云。舍利弗乃是大權之人。非為不解為取現迹所同實聲聞也。如恒河中有七眾生已下。此品大段第三引喻喻上生斷之義明。若當於上四句義中不能解者。作前二人。若能解者次第相續作。後五人微妙河者。上品中以煩惱為河。生死為水。此中以涅槃教為河。四種佛性為水。上勸修道見性以取現果。此中勸解佛性成後五人。上明不能修道沈沒生死。即亦迷沒涅槃之法。此中迷沒涅槃理教即亦迷沒生死河中。今且各舉一邊互明其義也。七人亦爾。今列二種七人。上品不列者。亦是互明耳。如上三人者不修善等三種人也。復有常沒非一闡提者。此是樂三有人沒在三有也。大望就常沒中自有是闡提自有是繫珠人沒之。三有而非闡提。暫出還沒亦爾。亦有常沒非一闡提。下引善星等者。此人若能讀誦十二修諸禪定名樂三有是第二人。若斷善根即為第一人也。從有漏戒生無漏戒故言戒。戒是人未剋為不具也。能牽果報名為作戒。不感生死為無作戒。隨道之戒背於生死名為捨戒也。所以不列習種性為住人者。以於中寬漫有退不退故不列也。列第三人住竟更不列後五人者。以斯自此以後無非住人可知故也。智不具足。凡有五事。自前已就舍利弗等明。今經住人。此下廣明住人。昔時之行故後成也。作不淨觀伏貪慈悲等觀各伏。所患思覺多人作數息觀通伏十使著我多者。分析界入。此等諸人皆求禪支中作如此觀情現離惡近求禪本遠求期生空。是人聞已者。總上諸人聞斯善反說觀法。已既得根本作生空觀。初正緣五陰壞苦壞無常。兼知眾生無性為觀不已。正觀生空兼知眾生為五所成文。言如法修行者。生空觀成也。次得念處者別入四空也。初正觀色身作壞苦壞無常兼知身無性為觀不已。正觀身空兼知身。是名用變壞苦無常身觀既然後三亦爾。此是思惠之始。若鈍人者次作正懃後作如意之觀。然後方能總四念處為一法之境。作行苦行無常兼知無性以入於煗。大望聞思位中趣空之始。要必先作壞苦壞無常兼知無性入斯空觀向現見之。初訖至羅漢要作行苦行無常兼知無性以入空也。文□次第作十二因緣者。此當是聲聞緣覺。乃是利根中乘之人作此觀也。然中乘之人直觀因緣。兼因緣無性以入於空不同小乘苦觀於前也。但就中有斯三根。今此中從念處後作十二因緣者。是利中下根也。然生空念處利鈍通作。是以利中下根亦作此觀。但自不作壞苦觀也。若中上二人不作生空念處之觀。直作三世因緣之觀。以入法空出法空。已知眾生亦空。斯猶下根。始入生空出知眾虛。入則無難。利中下根出念處觀。後逆觀十二別觀因緣。兼作壞無常。亦兼因緣無性。或正作壞無處常兼作因緣。及因緣無性入因緣之空。此猶是思惠不現之解。從此觀復總觀三世作□因緣。正作因緣。兼作行無常。亦兼因緣無性。或正作行無常兼作因緣。亦兼因緣無性。入因緣空成彼煗頂現見之解。若作四十四智觀者是利之中根。作七十七智觀者是利之上根。而此二人離想三世因緣之觀法用如前。而復有異。即向離觀之解有始末兩品。下品為聞惠。上品為思惠。總觀入煗訖于盡智以為修惠。下根之人生空之解。是其聞惠。是以不同。外道於十六行中。唯有集四苦二之六行故故無煗也。又云唯觀六行者。厭下三行無常苦不淨欣上三行常樂清淨。是以無煗。我弟子具足十六者。以其外人煗頂忍中用彼等智。始終具作十六行觀。若論正義煗等四心。亦有斯行故不非也。煗心報得色界五陰者。若作上生解者。由前煗心伏離欲結出觀心後起初禪愛受色地報也。若作不上生解者。由煗為因。藉四禪定發其勝煗。然此觀即是彼地第五行陰。若四空發煗其義亦爾。今且論報得色界五陰耳。煗是有法者。若作前解由煗次第起初禪愛受生色有名有法也。次煗起結為有漏所為名有為也。還能破壞有為有漏者。雖出觀起愛受報色地而由前觀解作因生。後勝觀故能破壞也。若作後解煗法為因生彼色地第五行煗故言有法也。有為如前。若爾從前有漏之煗生。後有漏煗法相續不絕。能生無漏破壞有漏有為之行下答可知。亦愛亦策者。出觀存陰故。愛入觀鑒空名策。得煗法人七十三種者。上明煗法。今明行法之人。就欲界煩惱分為九品。若伏一品作一人伏九品盡作九人。都未伏者。復作一人合成十人。從初釋至無所有處地。地之中分結為九。從伏而立各有九人。如是七九六十三通向欲界十人成七十三人也。所以不論非想地者。外人假上斷下非想以後更無禪地。以外道不能伏非想結。是故不論也。明此等人皆外凡時修禪伏結來入內凡作十六行觀而入於煗也。是人二種者是向五事。不具者一人五雖不具值遇善友教令觀行。次第入煗成彼住人終獲聖果。一人五事不具。復遇惡友起彼重惡沈淪四趣為還沒也。大意廣引。昔日五人者。一與今教作基。二遠明昔日五人皆有佛性。但昔不得說耳。頂法雖復性。是五陰而亦能作歷別四諦觀故。言亦緣四諦性。是五根者此字是誤。理亦應言性是五陰。所以然者。以此第一法次第能得色地果報。即體復是有漏五陰。是以不應言性是五陰根也。亦緣四諦者。昔在凡地未見五陰生滅之時。存法性有定有是常則不由因生此迷苦諦。亦迷集諦。性有是常則不可滅。即迷滅諦。道於性有無用即迷道諦。是則四諦俱迷。今修行得在現忍以上則見五陰生滅因緣體非自性則達。從因有苦道能滅累故言亦緣四帝也。所以名為苦法忍者。解云凡天下斷結有其三種。一者從厭伏斷不從理除外道是也。二從厭從理二乘是也。三者從理不從厭。菩薩是也。以菩薩人但從理故。故從理作名名無生法忍。聲聞之人從厭苦入空。是以通苦作名名苦法忍也。此苦法忍在無相行中。見四諦平等故言忍性。是惠緣於一諦。此三重者與餘或作本故言重也。文言亦攝一切所斷結者。略解重義。我見與邊見作本戒取與見取為本疑與邪見為本。成實中言。此三勝者根本中□也。餘使成在於後。此三起通前後為常所起大邪見心雖不起我見。然小邪見人乃無出世涅槃情。猶執有非想涅槃故。自俠我受生。是為我見。通餘四見故得名為常所起也。能生餘或因義理隱為微難識。又云。常所起者。身見疑戒取似道名微難識未麁易除本細難遣故難可斷也。是三對治者且名中相對耳。理實十使通覆三藏也。名有二種者。凡夫之時有順流名稱為舊名後成須陀。始得逆流名以為客名。以先得故者。須陀覆復得稱舊名。以後得故者。斯陀含名在後立故名客也。流有二種。一者解脫是無漏觀解。二者涅槃是滅結無為。所以論者為明一切聖人皆具此二得立同名也。從須陀洹者亦名菩薩以下。前明上名得同於下。自此已下復明下名得同於上也。緣有名共鑒空為不共。亦云苦集與凡共滅道名不共也。十六行者。苦下有四。所謂苦無常空無我。乃至道下四行。四四合有十六也。經言向果十六者。總而言之故有十六。若就人義分苦乃入道者。不為無常等。以無常入道者。不為苦等人情所樂隨觀何也。苦下既然。三諦類爾通束而言故有十六別而言之。見諦道中正有四諦觀無十二行也。而言無漏十六行者。無相行中不為十六。但總觀十六境空故言十六行也。果中十六類行中可知也。遍觀已行者。明斯陀含人進修勝觀斷三微品結以取上果名遍觀已行也。而有二種。一者食三果結令盡。二者修食。無漏令惠命相續也。斷三微結成那含果住在上界故名為住。凡有二種者。總束那含判為二相。現般為一相。自餘上生總為一相。中陰雖非色界。以向色界故盡屬色界也。一者現在得那含進修得羅漢者。此句是總。就中自有從那含果心入觀即成無著自有出入觀空而成羅漢。下言加現在涅槃者。此是從果心入觀即成者也。即亦為彰五人不同現般也。加無界涅槃者。廣果中生。命終以後越於五天生無色。而般即是樂定人也。亦應言加五天中般涅槃者。樂惠之人以界同故略而不明也。下文自當釋出二人行涅槃。復有二種者。此是舉行以明上流耳。非謂釋前行般。行般後文自當別釋。今所以舉行明上流者。以上言加無界般涅槃。今明無色界者。乃在上流位耳。不作上流唯取色地二身四身者也。論中乃不別立上流之人。今此中作五門說法而立之也。四身中受二者利。受三者中。受四者鈍。受一即是生中三人。是故但言受二乃至受四為上流也。因定自在發於理觀名自在定也。作業者明那含乃有凡時無明取緣造作此業也。無受生業者無有染著。色界生處起其妄愛潤業受報。以其欲生中陰不樂上生故也。然此中陰報業是凡夫時造此人具有生後二業都得受也。二心在羅漢始終通束故有四心。且就中般上生之始明四心耳。自餘那含皆得明也。今此中但明中陰以後上生之人故不明轉世亦可略而不明也。身證信得此之三人義通餘人故不論也。受身涅槃已下。釋上生中三人故。是就一生明利鈍三人與論經同也。受身中言生業者。受初禪生報業也。此業故未成聖果。凡時所造前中陰中言無受生業者明那含身中不造。言無今言受生業者。用凡時所造生報之業。初禪受生業家報各據一邊也。其實受生。即能厭苦入觀斷或道成羅漢證有餘涅槃。今言盡其壽命入涅槃者入無餘也。論云生般者就證有餘為語。此據無餘而言今昔不同故致問也。下答意受身已斷三界煩惱道成羅漢證有餘涅槃不乖論經也。行涅槃中明能斷煩惱入涅槃者證有餘也。無行其實利於行般與證論經同。今云壽盡入涅槃者入無餘也。上流涅槃者已下。正是章門中次第而釋。兼辨厭樂之異退生或時終不越生初禪之愛。要先起四禪。次生三禪。後生二禪方起初禪。今言生初禪愛者。就齊詣處作語耳。毘曇言不煩此言少廣彼言色究竟此云無小彼從下順明。此中從上逆明也。所以復明修熏禪者。上言修第四禪有五階差。今明修之方法。乃是熏修之修不同毘曇別有熏法也。而樂惠之人志欲修禪發惠為論義之本故。修熏禪樂定之人不欲發惠論義。直任業受生故不熏修無色定也。此之二人在他上流位中故。就上流章門中辨于二人故。下明二人。既竟還結上流也。樂惠之人不用生彼故。呵嘖無色定也。若欲入無色樂定之人。亦應呵責。五淨居中略不明也。欲界煩惱因緣有二者。一者內意三煩惱。二者外身口七惡也。上界唯有意三煩惱無身口七過故言無外也。又復上界於內己身起結。是多外他身上生患是少故也。未離欲界者。稟壽齊人故言未離。此是利根也。始離未至者。壽命據中是中根也。至色界者壽命長遠。與色報相似故言至邊。此是鈍根也。得食已住者。自下凡有六種明得食已住義。一明處在三界名住。即復是食受身二界相續受命故名食也。二明不受欲界五道之身。可謂食盡五道之身。更不復受故名為為住。已斷無量煩惱者。第三明食斷七禪地結盡。唯非想未除住在不起細中故名住也。四明食却共凡夫牽生善不善業盡住不造作中故言住也。五者能能自他生死因果住在不作二畏之中故名為住。六者食離二愛貪瞋永盡住在永離故名為住也。不離佛性水者。總結二種七人不離正因水也。是七眾生已下總結二種七人不離緣因水也。若有因則有果。所以問者。因上五不善五陰與善五陰作因。五陰與佛果作因故生此問。問意有因必無常涅槃是常則必無因。無因故亦無果。若無涅槃果亦無正因。性若爾那得上言不離正因水也。下答雖不從生因生從了因見是常住果。果既常住有正因水故不離也。方便果者。現在人功作事方便而得名方便果。果由過去善業而得名業行果亦云現在人功作業行也。下言是方便果者是略明者耳。亦應言是名業行果也。子能恩養名報恩果。由父母過去善業名為近也。由孝子之身而施恩養之事以為遠也。餘殘果者。一不殺戒相續始末分為二品。即為二報。正因正報。得彼現生之果。第三之身受後報業總別二果盡名餘殘果。大判善業。餘殘總報不得三塗中受別報得受不善業家餘殘亦爾。人中不得受總唯正得受別。今言如因不殺者。偏論善業餘殘果耳。近是過去三業淨十善之因遠是資身外如仙藥等為延年也。果報果者。此現在中品三業之善。過去下品因家果報。此中品善。能生上品之善。即指此上品善為果報家果也。此中品善述於往因故言果也。然過去之因欲使來報無窮。今此中品善復能生上品之果。酬往善因無窮之義故言報也。近因現在身口淨者。現在三業中品之善。望現上品是近故為近因。過去下品三業之善。望現上品是遠為遠因也。三解脫為一切煩惱作不生生因者。能斷煩惱使永不起為不生。下言生者能令後解相續而起故名為生。即有能了出涅槃之用故稱因也。沙門名八正道者。是其了因。因中道也。何緣故名沙門那者。廣解因沙門那了因義也。若有煩惱乏無惠道名煩惱為乏。又復煩惱不能運人遠到佛果名之為乏。從所斷作名名沙門也。阿羅漢已下。復流明第七人。羅漢等四人俱為第七。皆不離佛性水。其中有解不解有得不得。未知所以。自下料簡廣釋明二乘當有佛性故言不離。但偏學不解佛及菩薩能得解故。故不迷沒涅槃理教也。下明羅漢得五分法身。及以四智道出三界名到彼岸耳。不同佛菩薩究竟之地。言四智照已生或業果報盡處名我生。已盡智涅槃名梵。阿羅漢果初空觀真解道出三界名梵行已立。出盡智後生心緣此梵行已立名梵行已立。智當道作訖名所作已辦。生心緣當所作已辦道名所作辦智當未生或畢竟更不復受後有之果。生心緣彼不受後有名不受後有智。初後二智緣於滅諦。中間二智緣於道諦。就昔教中二乘四智涅槃形凡夫三果名為究竟具足無餘。就今經而論。唯佛得彰究竟具足無餘之稱耳。二乘四智涅槃不名究竟具足無餘。然二乘四智真解之體永無。或穢不奪清淨之名也。是七眾生不修身戒心惠已下所以來者。上恒河譬。總喻生斷明。若不解我所說中道之理四種佛性者作前二人。若能解者成後五人說喻擬人結合已竟。今還總舉而勸修也。明若不修身戒心惠者。則常沈沒作二人。若能者其必次第成後五人也。若有說言一闡提已下明中道佛性非有非無。若作定有定無執者皆謗三寶也。若不捨闡提之心即得菩提者。是名染著。若言畢竟不得乖必當得名妄語也。是七種人已下。還成前二執乖理是失也。一人具七者。明闡提發心修善次第相續。逕後五人終得作佛。成後不得名虛妄也。七人各一故。闡提之人守在初一非後六人未是得佛成前即得菩提是染著也。虛空現有通生之用佛性未是現有而用故。言非有如虛空也。當常佛性可修善而見不同兔角畢竟是無故。言非無如兔角也。不名一法乃至萬法者。明佛性真體絕于萬相。不可以其數量注論也。金剛已還下至闡提善以不善無記五陰等緣性無邊。亦不可以數量注局也。未得菩提已下。釋斯緣性兆是數量也。眾生佛性猶如虛空已下。此品大段第四明佛性與虛空有同有異也。所以發問者。經初已來每明佛性猶如虛空。次前後言佛性非有如虛空。前後相違不得不會故。迦葉致問為彰同異也。以是因緣者。以是虛空非三世攝。非內非外無有罣礙三因緣故。故名佛性如虛空也。無非虛空者。明世間無有一法。是有如四大非是虛空而為虛空之所對治。是故虛空無有對治破物之功。是以得知虛空是無非是有也。故言無非虛空對於虛空也。涅槃之法破諸煩惱萬行家果。是故名有也。或者執有實是大故。迦葉執或情而問。世間亦無非四大法。如虛空等□對四大。而是四大得為實有虛空無對。何為不有也。是有可見已下。明涅槃具此十三法故。得名為有虛空無。此故無也。汝意謂若離涅槃十三法外更有法者。正四大是有者。必三世攝非實有也。虛空若同四大是實有者。是三世攝也。下有二人計。虛空一人計。虛空與有並合一而有異。如計結眼著一匹緋。第二人計虛空在物中下自廣破。已合共合者。因中計果家計萬物未生之時已有。與虛空合性生時後與空合故。言已合共合也。若使虛空體是其有。而離虛豁虛空在有中住者。有物亦應離虛豁虛空在餘有中住。汝以兩有相礙不得相住者。虛空是有後是無礙亦不得住有。如今虛空遍一切處。故知是無也。風依虛空空無常故風亦無常者。若是有與風作因應是無常如前。地水是有與他作因是無常也。而虛空是常故。知是無也。我終不與世間共諍已下。此品大段第五明二諦也。此即廣上三解脫門三十七品為諸煩惱作不生生因下明三漏。廣上煩惱修道廣上三十七品。亦云廣前為破煩惱非涅槃故名為涅槃。此下廣明修道破除三漏煩惱之法。終得涅槃故得廣之接。次經文由上如來明隨自意語說於佛性意。謂如來不與物同故。次云不與世諍。亦云因上外人計虛空為明如來。廣破明虛空。是似與世諍明如來除物橫計。為同其旨內實無諍。次云不與世諍。又復上明佛性妙有常住不同三世異於虛空理應修善了之故。下正明修道斷累顯性之義也。云何為色從煩惱生者。上言凡夫色從煩惱生。是以無常苦無我不淨。今欲使行者識根除本故。發問言色從云何許煩惱而生。下答從三漏煩惱生也。自下大意明凡夫從三漏生故無常。當法身不從三漏。是故常樂也。從煩惱三種已下。第一段略明三漏。就中凡有五段明義。第一從初已下。此明觀三漏過患。第二當觀一切有漏煩惱已下。此明觀三漏因。第三從次觀果報已下。此明觀三漏果報。第四從觀果報已已下。此明觀三漏輕重。作輕重觀者。為欲修道滅除之也。第五從是人爾時精進修道已下。明修道斷煩惱也。從云何名為欲漏有漏無明漏已下。第二廣明三漏。就中亦有五文。還廣上五。第一從初已下。此還廣上三漏過患。云何名為欲漏有漏無明漏者。問意得知。凡色從三漏者。問意得知凡色。從三漏生故。無常苦未識三漏。復云何得生。下答內外因緣故得生也。無明即一切諸漏根本者。九使前八品無明。能使生九使諸漏之體名為根本。何以故已下。偏明我見。前無明能生我見成前句根本之義。即亦通類諸使前無明能生諸使為根本之義。所以但就我見釋者。以是諸見之原故也。於陰界入謂有眾生因是次第生我見前無明也。想倒者妄情分別。謂實眾生受心起時亦妄緣實生見倒者。行心之中我見前無明也。以是因緣已下。向就我見釋竟。今還總結九使。前無明生其九使一切漏也。下引經作證說。無明者通舉九使。前八品無明也。貪瞋癡因者。貪瞋前無明與上品貪瞋作因癡通七使。今言癡因者。七使前無明與上品七使作因。何以得知。癡通七使。論經三不善中問。何故不說慢等。答言以癡攝故。故得知也。然三不善中增微合說。今三毒明義。但取上品不通無明。若就十惡十使明義。准取上品貪瞋邪見也。今言與貪等作因者。作習因也。若隔行而生為增上緣生。若過去無生因者。現起中上容與攝行中上為生因而生因義難下不能與中上為生因。要同類攝行相望及上品生中下品中品生下品有生因義也。行心之始八品之前未成使者。微貪瞋癡名不善思惟作次第習因生於無明名為因也。無明生不善思惟者。作其生因生後行之初不善思惟也。生煩惱因緣者。外緣五塵也。親近名無明者。此據內心無明作語不善思惟。習生中近如子生外五塵遠發如四大也。是內無明者。九使前八實通內外境上而生。今言內者經文略也。此無明使即亦是漏。生諸漏者。生諸漏者生九使體。然九使內外境成由前無明而生名內外因也。無明名內倒者。通舉九使。前無明此是輕倒。不識無常等者。此文是略。亦不識常樂等。此以到成其漏義也。第二從世尊如佛所說有智之人已下。此明觀煩惱因也。造作何行生煩惱者。明多瞋人。若作不淨觀行必更生瞋為生此煩惱也。憍慢時不宜修智心沒不宜修定必生煩惱故。言時中時生煩惱也。惡知識等即是誰也。共同止住必生煩惱也。轉下作中乃至中業作上。此猶明生煩惱義耳。但為明煩惱三品增長生三品業。舉業為成煩惱增長故小異也。眾生一身云何能起種種煩惱者。此為欲明現在煩惱皆由過去煩惱為因。是以今現遇緣而生得生也。第三從世尊智者云何觀於果報已下。此次明觀三漏果報也。依上略門中。第四明煩惱輕重。此中略而不釋也。從智者觀已為斷。如是煩惱果報已下。訖至迦葉白佛云何名為清淨梵行以來。此還廣上略門第五修道斷煩惱也。眾生皆從煩惱而得果者。迦葉因上無始終無明相生復說其斷即執無始終相生明無窮故。不可得斷無修道義也。眾生觀受已下。却推漏因大意欲明受想觸欲是煩惱因。又多過患故須修道而斷除也。又復為遣眾疑。是以自下廣就受想乃訖業苦離釋以明有修道義。就觀受中亦有五種觀門。第一從初已下明觀其受體為一切愛。作近因者。前總明三受生於諸。此下但明樂受近生其愛。以是受生義強過患處多。是以偏觀生其厭離也。明萬境上愛皆由受生。名與一切作近因也。亦云五識五意識第六意識後所起愛者。皆由受生名一切與而作近因也。餘二受與瞋癡為近因也。第二從既觀受已下。此明觀其受因。其實受由想生。言不從想生者。不從神我士夫神我想生也。第三從智者。觀因已次觀果報已下。明觀受果報。唯是其苦故。能深厭除斷受因。何等受能作愛者。樂受生愛名為作愛。何等愛能作受者。現受遠從過去愛生也。第四從若能如是深觀愛因已下。此明斷受也。深觀愛因者。受是愛因。受因者過愛與現受為因。亦云愛因者指愛是受因也。受因者指受是愛因也。然斷之有方。要由理觀。是以第五知從八正即便修集已下。明其修道成向斷義由起樂受動發身心廣為其惡名為增長。餘二受亦爾。又云由樂受故。身心調暢。由苦受故損於身心。由捨受故身心調和。皆名增長。亦可三受在心身拔外彰為增長耳。想從無明生復生後或名無明觸。從前解生復生後解名為明觸。從善無記生復生善無記名非明非無明觸。解云。明觸者生空真觀以上訖盡無生出觀心。後識緣五塵生想緣假不著名用之解名為明也。文言即八正道者。由空觀八正導想不著故言即也。二觸增長者。次第增長也。下明想門欲門業苦等門。皆有五義。同上受中尋文可知也。及觀受時亦不生貪者。欲明意地貪不從五識後受生。亦云此貪何由而生。皆由前適想故起為彰想過故言受下生貪也。就門中明大小無量者。皆是外人所計神我。所以皆作想名說者。由想執實後計於我。是故名我為想。又云外人貴想故名我為想也。三想滅名解脫也。智者觀欲已下次明欲也。上明受想是其漏因。今明欲者。是明漏體。又云此明欲者故是上愛更無別法。所以復明者。為明愛是受生之本有多過患故。作異名重彰之也。又復所以更舉來者。為下生業故也。就欲門中明欲體欲因并列合明無有別文也。十種想者。當是十惡也。煩惱能發生於業名為生業。業是正業名為受業煩惱非正名為不作也。與業共行者共行一境亦云俱能感果共行生死也。則有二種者。一作生業者發業生也。二作受業者潤業受生也。業因即無明觸者。由前想觸及行中無明并行九使次第發生於業名為因耳 非生因也。閻浮善業是劣。為強煩惱作緣而發故。言上上因緣生閻浮也。北方善業是勝。為微煩惱之所發潤故。即下下因緣生欝單曰東西二方昇降可知也。次觀是是所得果報以下。次明觀苦。就中明觀三世十二因緣展轉生苦也。從智者復觀已下。此明觀過去煩惱因緣生現眾苦。從苦因緣故生於煩惱已下。此明現在業及煩惱生未來苦。從有因緣生有已下。此明未來業以煩惱復生來苦無有窮畔。其猶預還也。從智者若能下此以明。若能作向三世十二因緣。總觀三苦者。必新故兩已不受生死。此是勸觀結句也。從有智之人已下。別觀苦苦。從作是觀已復觀人天已下。此別觀壞苦。其中亦有苦苦。從智者深觀已下。訖盡為苦所壞亦復如是。此是別觀行苦。亦可總觀三苦也。從智者若能觀苦八種盡下能斷眾苦。此總舉結勸也。苦果報者。苦是果報文文六名取者是取因果報也。又云苦果名取者。類下文者。應改苦字為愛字。應言愛果名取也。下文更明愛果名取者。重舉為明斷也。愛因緣取者。思前八品第九愛名取。取因緣愛者。思復愛也。云何名為清淨梵行已下。此品大段第六廣明道體梵行為宗。上來通明有漏善行以為梵行名眾生中有妙藥王。此下將欲簡却有漏善行。唯取初住以上真無漏觀以為梵行也。就此段中凡有二段。第一從初已下。正明真無漏體以為梵行。第二從十想已下。明住前觀行得無漏之由。就前段中凡有四段。第一從初已下。此總明初住以上無邊行法以為梵行。第二從如我先說此經雖攝一切諸法已下。明三十七品以為梵行。第三從若有菩薩於三十七品知根知因已下。就九法以為梵行。第四從世劣根本因增已下。就三法以明梵行所以。初總後別始廣終略者。當是根有利鈍。宜悟不同故也。濟生死貧苦名寶。收理斯盡攝藏。從大海已下譬藏猛風已下譬寶。從畢竟者即是涅槃已下訖至下偈。第二就十想之觀以為梵行所以。明十想者。明上十地中行三十七品無漏真解。何由而成。藉此十想始時之觀故得故次明也。解云。此十想觀正是住前理觀之智作想名而說耳。如上二十五三昧。其實是智作三昧名說也。作十想觀故能成萬行。終得向者畢竟涅槃故應修也。具上六想故能生下七種之心。由六生七故言即七想。因此七種心猶成六想也。能呵三界。即是第七多過罪想故須呵也。遠離者是第八因果通離也。滅除者是第九想。唯舉十使諸煩惱也。於三界中不生愛著。即是第十無愛想偏明一愛也。爾時迦葉即於佛前已下訖偈。此品大段第七明迦葉現同始悟領解歡喜說偈嘆佛也。就偈中初二偈讚嘆如來常住真體。次下四偈讚嘆如來因時所行。自下竟偈讚嘆如來能垂大悲救拔物苦令其永離也。
If nature is included in the three times, it is impermanent. Fourth, from "if one who has cut off roots of goodness possesses the Buddha-Nature" onward, the debate over fixed existence or fixed non-existence is the question. From "for the sake of beings, there are four kinds of answers" onward, the four answers given in the past are first clarified. The reason for clarifying them is: first, to show the present by means of the past; second, to show that the present is different from the past. From "the Tathāgata's ten powers and fearlessness" up to the "six minor views," this is called a discriminating answer. This answers the first question. It first sets forth the conditional and the direct cause beforehand. "As you previously asked" – this refers to the first question in answering. The meaning of the answer is that a person who has cut off roots of goodness does, in reality, possess those two kinds of Buddha-Nature of the future Tathāgata body. However, due to the obstruction of present false views and conditions, they are absent. "The Tathāgata's Buddha-Nature is not in the past..." answers the third question, clarifying that the direct cause is constant and not within the three times. "The future body's Buddha-Nature is in the present and future..." answers the second question. Within this, it always concurrently answers the third question. The reason the third question was answered first earlier is to clarify that the direct cause is not in the three times. The future body's two times, the nine abodes before, and the meaning of increasing by one is thus explained. As for "future body's two times": it takes the initial able-to-see mind as the present. From then on, the seeing mind is bound as truth. In the future, before attaining enlightenment, Buddha-Nature as cause is included in the three times. In the position of the first abode and before, in the sphere of outflows, it is the five aggregates of non-good and the cause of Buddha-Nature, hence it is included in the three times. The result is not so. There are the three times and the non-three times. From the first ground up to the tenth ground, these good five aggregates are the result of the non-good five aggregates. Because the essence is impermanent, they are included in the three times. The five aggregates of the Buddha's result are the result of the good five aggregates. Because the essence is permanent, they are not included in the three times. From the tenth ground down to the sixth abode, it clarifies the Buddha's cause. Therefore, "past, present, and future results are also thus" – the meaning is the same. From the fifth abode to the first abode... because of this. "Past, present, and future results are also thus" – because the meaning is the same as before... the nature in six or seven kinds. In this [passage] it clarifies that the icchantika (one of extreme disbelief) of the conditioned direct cause possesses it in the future. As for... the fourth question. "I also do not say" – also does not say partially; leaving it unsaid is called a "setting-aside answer." Also, some say that setting aside false views is called a "setting-aside answer." "What is called cause?" – "past, present, and future" – this is to assign it to a person, hence the question is raised. Furthermore, it says: above, the cause and result were extensively clarified as being within the three times and not within the three times. The point of this question is: the cause, therefore, being within the three times, and the result, therefore, being both within and not within the three times. The meaning of the answer is: the cause is the non-good five aggregates, therefore it is included in the three times. The results include both the result of the non-good five aggregates and the result of the good five aggregates, therefore they are both within and not within the three times. From here on, the distinction of conditions for the three times and the non-three times is extensively clarified. The section from "All ignorance" onward comprises three parts in total, extensively explaining that the conditioned cause is included in the realms (of time) while the direct cause is not included in the realms. The first part directly explains the principle: the conditioned cause is included in the three times, the direct cause is not included in the realms. As for... onward, this is the second part, citing accomplished sutras to clarify the inclusion or non-inclusion of the conditioned and direct causes. From "the stream-enterer (śrotāpanna) person" onward, this is the third part, using persons to clarify the inclusion or non-inclusion of the conditioned and direct causes. "The śrāvaka (disciple) is like milk": earlier, the Tathāgata, in order to establish the meaning of the gradual increase method, explained from the Buddha downwards. Here, in order to establish the preceding subtlety and the following manifestation, it is explained from the lower upwards. The lower grade of the tenth abode is for the pratyekabuddha (solitary realizer); the upper grade is for the bodhisattva. "Five, six, seven kinds in the future" – what meaning does this clarify again? Above, only the two kinds of Buddha-Nature, the conditioned and the direct causes, were explained to clarify the arising of goodness. From here on, the meaning of the arising of goodness is clarified. "Future karma, non-karma, arising, and ultimately not producing results" – this is to clarify that the future Buddha-Nature certainly exists. Therefore, it can produce present goodness, unlike future karma. Also, it is said that this future karma, not yet existing, cannot produce results. When a lower-grade cause exists in the present, a middle-grade karma will certainly arise in the future. When the future time arrives, it will certainly be able to produce a result. Therefore, it is called 'having Buddha-Nature.' Also, since it does not yet exist, it is not called an existing state. Because it will certainly exist, it is called 'is to have.' Because it is to have, it induces the arising of present goodness. Based on the above future karma, because it has not yet arisen, it ultimately does not produce a result. Then one takes this as a problem and argues: future Buddha-Nature does not exist at that moment – how can it produce goodness? Below, two similes are used to illustrate the meaning of production. The passage "if it is said that the five aggregates are Buddha-Nature" from here reverts to the main topic and extensively clarifies the principle of the Middle Way of Buddha-Nature, which is neither existent nor non-existent. It again answers the fourth question from above, clarifying that it is neither fixedly existent nor fixedly non-existent. From here, it will clarify the arising of goodness. First, it holds a position to clarify the Middle Way, because this is the root of the arising of goodness. Holding that the present aggregates are nature, it asks. However, it only mentions one specific position; in reality, it extensively raises various doubts. Holding the conditioned as the direct cause, it says that beings who have lost their intention do not understand. This means a misunderstanding. Therefore, the present non-existence of Buddha-Nature is the "neither existent"; or sometimes, when understanding arises, it clarifies that Buddha-Nature is not utterly non-existent. The Middle Way, being neither existent nor non-existent, is its meaning. "I, for the sake of beings, to cause them to attain understanding" – those who hold to inner/outer, existence/non-existence, none of them attain understanding. Below, it clarifies "neither inner nor outer," using space and rabbit's horns in six metaphors to clarify the "neither existent nor non-existent," causing them to generate understanding – this is "causing liberation." As for "taking milk for a feverish illness": explanation: In foreign countries, milk is cold and cheese is hot. Therefore, taking milk removes the fever illness. But taking it excessively creates a cold illness. Taking cheese can remove the cold illness, but taking it excessively again creates a fever illness. If following this region's nature where milk is hot and cheese is cold, then saying "taking milk for a fever illness" would be treating heat with heat. And saying "taking cheese for a diarrhea illness" would be treating cold with cold. "Milk creates a cold illness" clarifies that milk not only can treat a fever illness when produced, but also can treat a cold illness. The following saying "cheese creates a fever illness" has a similar meaning. If it is said that the five tastes exist beforehand and are only manifested when conditions arise – like the inner great elements needing the outer great elements to increase – this meaning cannot be so. Why is it not so? Because the five tastes are spoken of in sequence from one another. They do not come from many sources, but only come from two conditions, obtaining cheese from milk, raw butter, up to ghee. All phenomena are not like this, only obtained from two conditions. "Not obtained by skillful means" – this is not correct. They can be obtained from two skillful means, but rather are obtained from five conditions. "What can increase the inner and outer four great elements is also thus" – all are originally non-existent, arising from conditions. Furthermore, the taking of a view is to refute the other's position that within the cause of milk there is already the result of cheese, not needing skillful means to begin to obtain cheese. Buddha-Nature is also thus: it exists beforehand within the body, not obtained by conditions. This is a false view. According to our correct principle, it is said "raw butter and others are not thus" – meaning they do not exist beforehand and are not obtained without skillful means. This clarifies they are originally non-existent and obtained through skillful means. The four great elements and Buddha-Nature are both like this: they must rely on conditions. From "as I have spoken of the twelve divisions of the scriptures..." up to "...making an exclusive interpretation" – this clarifies that biased attachment is a disease, and advises faith in the Middle Way to generate goodness. Furthermore, it clarifies that in the past scriptures, depending on the spontaneous speech, impermanent teachings were spoken. One could still generate understanding from them. How much more so for the present teaching of Buddha-Nature based on spontaneous speech? How could one not generate understanding? Even the "existence or non-existence of the icchantika's Buddha-Nature is also thus" – it clarifies that when the icchantika becomes a Buddha, the existence or non-existence of Buddha-Nature is identical to the existence or non-existence of the present Buddha, with no difference. It also says that the icchantika, in the present, has an evil name and lacks goodness. In the past, discussing emptiness with Maitreya, viewed from today, it is worldly truth. But the principle of emptiness is profound and mysterious, so Śāriputra and others could not generate understanding. But why Subhūti and others could preach for the great bodhisattvas was due to the Tathāgata's addition and sympathy. Even the worldly truth of emptiness was still not understood. How much less the ultimate truth of Buddha-Nature? Therefore, one should not impulsively form a one-sided interpretation without following the Buddha's words. Moreover, it is said that Śāriputra is a person of great authority and not one who does not understand. It is only to display the common ground of the manifested form which is actually a śrāvaka. From "like seven beings in the Ganges river" onward: this is the third major section of this chapter, introducing a simile to illustrate the previously explained meaning of arising and severance. It clarifies that if one cannot understand the meaning of the previous four sentences, one belongs to the first two persons. If one can understand, one sequentially becomes the latter five persons. "Subtle river": in the previous upper chapter, afflictions were taken as the river and birth-and-death as the water. Here, the teaching of Nirvana is taken as the river and the four kinds of Buddha-Nature as the water. Above, cultivating the path and seeing one's nature to attain the present fruit was encouraged. Here, understanding Buddha-Nature to become the latter five persons is encouraged. Above, it was clarified that not cultivating the path leads to sinking in birth-and-death, which also means becoming lost in the Dharma of Nirvana. Here, being lost in the principle and teaching of Nirvana also means becoming lost in the river of birth-and-death. Now, each side is taken separately to mutually clarify the meaning. The seven persons are also thus. Two kinds of seven persons are listed now. In the previous upper chapter, they were not listed. This is also mutual clarification. "Like the above three persons" – these are the three types who do not cultivate goodness, etc. "Furthermore, there is one who constantly sinks but is not an icchantika" – this is one who delights in the three realms and sinks within them. In a broader sense, within the "constantly sinking" there are those who are icchantikas and those who are "pearl-tie persons" who sink in the three realms but are not icchantikas. "Temporarily emerging and then sinking again" is also thus. There is also "one who constantly sinks but is not an icchantika." Below, citing Sunaksatra and others – if this person can recite and study the twelve (scriptures) and cultivate the various contemplations and fixations, they are called "one who delights in the three realms" and are the second person. If they cut off the roots of goodness, they become the first person. "From the outflows-precept arises the non-outflows precept, hence 'precept.' The precept is incomplete when the person has not yet achieved (the goal). 'That which can lead to retribution' is called 'created precept.' 'That which does not cause birth-and-death' is called 'uncreated precept.' 'The precept that follows the path, turning away from birth-and-death' is called 'the relinquishing precept.'" The reason the 'class-nature abode' is not listed as a 'dwelling person' is because within it there is a laxity [possibility of progress or not], so it is not listed. After listing the third 'dwelling person,' the latter five persons are not further listed because from this point onward, all are 'dwelling persons,' so it is understood without listing. "Wisdom is not complete" – there are altogether five matters. Previously, this was addressed regarding Śāriputra and others. Now the sutra clarifies the 'dwelling persons.' From here on, it extensively clarifies the practices of the 'dwelling persons' from the past, which they later accomplish. "Practicing the impure contemplation to subdue craving, and contemplations like loving-kindness, etc., each subdues their respective ailments. Those with many discursive thoughts practice breath counting contemplation to subdue all ten fetters. Those with strong self-attachment analyze the sense spheres and elements." All these persons, in seeking the factors of absorption, make these contemplations, the state being aversion to evil and seeking the root of absorption in the near [term] and seeking emptiness of the self in the far [term]. "When this person hears it" – this sums up all the above persons hearing this good reverse [i.e., turning from evil] preaching of the contemplation method. Having already obtained the foundation, they practice the emptiness-of-self contemplation. Initially, they correctly observe the five aggregates as characterized by decay-suffering and decay-impermanence. Concurrently, they know that beings have no self-nature, and they observe this without ceasing. The correct contemplation of the emptiness of self concurrently knows that beings are composed of the five aggregates. The text says "cultivating the Dharma accordingly" – this means the contemplation of the emptiness of self is accomplished. "Next attaining the 'place of mindfulness' " – this means entering individually the four formless attainments. Initially, they correctly observe the physical body as characterized by decay-suffering and decay-impermanence. Concurrently, they know the body has no self-nature, and they observe this without ceasing. The correct contemplation of the emptiness of the body concurrently knows that the body is. This is called using the characteristic of decay-suffering and decay-impermanence [for] the body contemplation. The remaining three are also thus. This is the beginning of the wisdom of reflection. If they are blunt-natured individuals, they next practice the "right efforts" and then the "conducive states of mind" contemplation. Only then can they gather the four places of mindfulness as the object of one single Dharma. They practice the contemplation of the suffering of conditioned existence and impermanence, concurrently knowing the lack of self-nature, in order to enter the stage of heat. In a general sense, within the stage of hearing and reflection, [this contemplation] is the beginning of tending toward emptiness. They must first make the contemplation of decay-suffering and decay-impermanence, concurrently knowing the lack of self-nature, to enter this emptiness contemplation directed toward the visible. From the beginning up to Arhat, they must make the contemplation of the suffering of conditioned existence and impermanence, concurrently knowing the lack of self-nature, to enter emptiness. The text... sequentially makes the contemplation of the twelve links of dependent arising. This is created by śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas. These are sharp-rooted persons of the middle vehicle who make this contemplation. However, persons of the middle vehicle directly contemplate dependent arising, concurrently [contemplate] the lack of self-nature in dependent arising, to enter emptiness. They are different from the small vehicle's preceding suffering contemplation. But within this, there are these three root-types. Now here, after the 'place of mindfulness' stage, making the contemplation of the twelve links is for the middle and lower roots among the sharp. The 'place of mindfulness' of emptiness of self is practiced by both sharp and dull. Therefore, those of middle and lower roots among the sharp also make this contemplation, but they do not themselves make the contemplation of decay-suffering. For those of the upper and middle upper roots, they do not make the contemplation of the 'place of mindfulness' of emptiness of self. They directly make the contemplation of the three-temporal dependent arising in order to enter the emptiness of dharmas. Emerging from the emptiness of dharmas, they already know that beings are also empty. These are still the lower roots: they begin by entering emptiness of self and emerging to know the emptiness of the self. Entering [this wisdom] is not difficult. Those among the sharp, middle, and lower roots, after emerging from the 'place of mindfulness' contemplation, then reverse-contemplate the twelve [links], individually contemplating dependent arising. They concurrently make [the contemplation of] decay-impermanence. They also concurrently [contemplate] the lack of self-nature in dependent arising. Or they make the contemplation of decay, non-abiding, and impermanence, concurrently dependent arising, and the lack of self-nature in dependent arising to enter the emptiness of dependent arising. This is still the understanding of wisdom through reflection but not visible. From this contemplation, they again collectively contemplate the three times, making the contemplation of... links. They make the contemplation of the links primarily, concurrently make the contemplation of conditioned-life impermanence, and also concurrently [contemplate] the lack of self-nature in the links. Or they primarily make the contemplation of conditioned-life impermanence, concurrently make [the contemplation of] the links, and also concurrently [contemplate] the lack of self-nature in the links. They enter the emptiness of the links, becoming the visible understanding of the heat and summit stages. If one makes the contemplation of forty-four wisdoms, they are of the sharp, middle root. If one makes the contemplation of seventy-seven wisdoms, they are of the sharp, upper root. These two persons separate their thinking from the contemplation of three-temporal links. The method of contemplative function is as before, but also has differences. That is, the understanding of the separation contemplation has a beginning and an end, two grades: the lower grade is wisdom from hearing; the upper grade is wisdom from reflection. The collective contemplation enters the heat stage up to the knowledge of exhaustion as cultivation wisdom. For the lower-root person, the understanding of the emptiness of self is their wisdom from hearing. Therefore, they are different. The reason outsiders do not have the heat stage among the sixteen practices is that they only have six practices: the four [truths] of suffering and two of arising. Therefore, they do not have the heat stage. It is also said: "Only observe the six practices" – they dislike the lower three practices of impermanence, suffering, and impurity, and delight in the upper three practices of permanence, bliss, and purity. Therefore, they do not have the heat stage. "My disciples have the complete sixteen" – because the outsiders, in the stages of heat, summit, acceptance, use wisdom of this kind. Throughout the beginning and end, they fully practice the sixteen practices. Regarding the correct meaning, the four minds of heat, etc., also have these practices, so it is not wrong. "The heat mind obtains the retribution of the five aggregates of the form realm" – if one makes the interpretation of being reborn upward, then by the power of the previous heat mind that has subdued and separated from the desire fetters, after emerging from the contemplation mind, they initially give rise to the craving for the first dhyana (absorption) and receive the retribution of the form realm. If one makes the interpretation of not being reborn upward, then with the heat as the cause, relying on the four dhyanas to stimulate the superior heat. Now, this contemplation itself is the fifth aggregate of the aggregates of that realm. If the four formless attainments stimulate the heat, their meaning is also thus. For now, we only discuss the retribution of the five aggregates of the form realm. "Heat is a possessor" – if one makes the former interpretation, then by the heat they sequentially give rise to the craving for the first dhyana and receive birth in the form realm. This is called "possession." "Subsequently, the heat gives rise to fetters" – they are actions of outflows, called "action-born." "And were also able to destroy the actions and outflows" – although they emerge from the contemplation and give rise to craving, receiving retribution in the form realm, because this [retribution] is produced using the previous contemplative understanding as the cause, it can give birth to superior contemplations later. Therefore, it can destroy. If one makes the latter interpretation, the heat as the cause gives birth to that fifth aggregate heat of the form realm. Therefore, it is called "possession." "Action-born" is as before. If so, from the previous outflows-heat arises the subsequent outflows-heat, the continuity of heat without interruption, able to give birth to non-outflows, destroying the actions and outflows. The answer below is thus understandable. "Also attached, also inspired" – because emerging from contemplation, preserving the aggregates, is attachment; entering contemplation, reflecting on emptiness, is inspiration. "The persons who attain the Dharma of heat – seventy-three kinds" – above, the heat-method was clarified. Now, the persons who practice the method are clarified. The afflictions of the desire realm are divided into nine grades. If one subdues one grade, they become one person; if one subdues all nine grades, they become nine persons. Those who have not subdued any constitute one person. This makes ten persons. From the first [dhyana] up to the sphere of nothingness, on each stage, the fetters are divided into nine. Based on subduing, there are nine persons each. Thus, seven nines make sixty-three. Adding the ten persons from the desire realm makes seventy-three persons. The reason the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception is not discussed is that the outsiders, relying on the higher to cut off the lower, have no further meditation stage after the sphere of nothingness. As outsiders cannot subdue the fetters of the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, it is not discussed. It clarifies that these persons, when they were ordinary beings, cultivated dhyana and subdued fetters, and then entered the inner ordinary stage to practice the sixteen practices and entered the heat stage. "These persons are of two kinds" – these are those of the earlier "five matters are incomplete." One person, although the five are incomplete, meets good friends who teach them to practice contemplation. They sequentially enter the heat stage, become a "dwelling person," and ultimately attain the holy fruit. One person, with the five matters incomplete, meets bad friends who cause them to engage in grave evil, causing them to fall into the four evil destinies as one who "has sunk and not yet re-emerged." The general meaning is extensively drawn: the five persons of the past serve as a foundation for the present teaching and far-sightedly clarify that all five persons possessed Buddha-Nature, but it could not be explained in the past. "The summit-method, although in its nature it is the five aggregates, can also discern the sequential four truths. Therefore, it is said to 'condition the four truths.' 'In its nature, it is the five faculties' – this character is a mistake. The principle also should state 'its nature is the five aggregates.' The reason being: this first method can sequentially obtain the retribution of the form realm, but its essence itself is still the five aggregates of outflows. Therefore, it should not say 'its nature is the five aggregates faculties.' 'It also conditions the four truths' – in the past, while in the ordinary stage, before seeing the arising and cessation of the five aggregates, holding that the nature of phenomena has fixed existence, is permanent, and does not arise from causes – this delusion regarding the truth of suffering also deludes regarding the truth of arising. 'Nature has fixed existence, is permanent, then it cannot be extinguished' – this deludes regarding the truth of cessation. 'The path is useless for fixed nature' – this deludes regarding the truth of the path. Thus, all four truths are deluded. Now, by cultivating the path and attaining the stage of acceptance and above, they see the arising and cessation of the five aggregates, that the essence of dependent arising is not self-nature, and then realize that suffering arises from causes, and the path can extinguish the accumulation. Therefore
憍陳如品
Chapter on Kaundinya
龍記
Dragon Chronicle
凡經有三分序正流通。從純陀品已來訖向迦葉品。明經之正體以常住因果以為宗致。然經必流通曠被一切。是以自此已下訖經。明摧天魔制外道明法輪下無有異見異學。既已大法得行。即是大段第三流通文。解云上大眾問品明斯現常師子迦葉。此之二品明斯常當今此一品總結二常。經文接次上明道行二諦觀解三十七品十想等行。是斯了因。今出果顯常住五陰所了之果。又解復常住果現由當性正因。即亦通如常住當性常住五陰可謂即是總結二常故次明也。此中所以對憍陳如者。為顯如來有斯始終可為大人。又後十仙悟機時至緣在陳如故。對斯人辯常五陰。欲使領會始終二教。然後得以十仙而付之也。憍陳如色是無常已下。解云。此下大望依今經四諦而辯之也。從初已下對苦諦以明常住五陰。從色是無明已下。此對集諦而明常住五陰。明色能緣生集諦之體故名集也。從色非歸依已下。訖盡獲得涅槃寂靜之色。此明常樂第一義諦寂滅萬相為真滅諦歸依處也。滅道同體不更別明也。此明四諦者。為彰凡夫起彼三漏造作集因。是以體是苦空無常無我不淨如來三漏久除塵習永亡故。得真體常樂我淨。一切外道虛假詐稱。所以乃唱此等語者。明諸外道機發時至故作是說。令懷忿而來論義生解也。於此大眾之中作師子吼。至汝亦作師子吼。凡師子吼法有斯二義。一者欲令同類安隱。二者欲悟長眠之者。汝若能如是。則久始心增解佛法安隱。又解能使彼長迷得反。是故汝當宣說常無常義。令斯聞者得不遍之解。下所以先降伏十仙及諸魔者。恐如來滅後懷亂佛法故也。共往阿闍世所者。解云。外國論義之法。要先白王聽許則論。不聽便止。汝若夢見者。諸外道等明欲論義。今夕乞夢夢曰。塔地斯久致朦夢已遂心故。說此意未足可信也。大三月可增減等者。明現可驗實不應輕夢也。瞿曇直自過有施福現因呪力故。能如是實無智慧。我等有智不應見輕也。三意諸仁者已下。明往事難信。且驗以今實玄知有益。是以聽許也。從性生大者。若依百論而說者。此中應意從性生覺。今云大者。即是諸計覺諦也。從大生慢者。是即所計我心諦。從慢生十六法。所謂地水等者。好作次第。應言從慢生五微塵。從五微塵而生五大。從五大生諸根。若如是布文乃是次第耳。心平等根者。其人意謂心是色法平等。為彼四大而成因不偏故。故能遍取色等五塵也。是十六法從五法生者。此文可謂是次第也。下言塵字應是麁字。瞋麁動故耳。依百論者。應有第四對自在。此中略也。是二十五法皆因性生者。正應言二十四法因性生文中小長也。如是二語無有二者。昔說無常為表性空。今辨常住表無萬相妙無真空來空無差為無二也。若人各一我遍一切處者。是為一身中多我聚集是義不然。又復我若遍者。一人我遍餘人之我無安置處不同。假法光影同室故不得遍也。上六城中難者。遍則雜合。今難先尼遍應同造故得異也。下答遍而不造。何故而然。天德我遍到佛德所造善中時。天德我睡眠悶故神勢不發故不造善。佛德我亦爾。非業作者。法與非法非是我所作業也。是燈光明亦炷邊者。自下凡作二破計我遍先作不遍而破明光在炷邊炷中則無我在法非法邊法非法中則無我無故不遍也。汝意若謂已下。第二作不異而破向引明異於炷。今明炷增則明盛。炷枯則明滅。故知明不異炷炷不異明法非法我三事即為一也。意在理中不一不異而破。但以先尼執異故。今且作不異而破也。是事不吉者。先尼執其自性。謂已不吉佛亦不吉。何故復說也。如來向者。難其炷明正是一體。於先尼不得成喻似若成用在佛故發此言佛亦不吉也。我所引喻已下乃訖今還教汝。此明如來凡所說法無有定。是故我實無執。以汝執異我為說一以明不異。若執定一故。我說異以彰不一教。汝離執我自無執。汝意若謂若我不吉汝亦不吉已下。此則自作。謂吉於已非吉吉在他也。富那執六十二見作□常無常。就現在五陰。一陰有四句通為二十見邊無邊。就未來五陰亦作二十如去不如去。就過去五陰復作二十身異命異復作二見。此二就眾生上計并為六十二見。亦云執十六見常無常為四見邊無邊為四見。身異命異為四見。如去不如去為四見。通十六見也。三界為大村諸賢聖為娑羅林。如來為一樹行在物前為先林也。假名行者。喻如林主亦可通勝定光佛等為林主也。隨時修治者。譬自行外化廣修緣因萬行修滿也。眾累永亡妙果常存。譬陳朽脫落唯真實在也。故名無明者 斷過二因除現五因。新名取有者。斷現三因未來生死也。犢子梵志凡作三意問於如來。一者為識同異。二者為欲惱亂。三為知解。是故問也。如來以斯為惱亂故。是以默然故。梵志即念不為惱亂為知故問。如來見意即勸問也。納衣梵志計萬法自性凡作八句。初問之中凡有三意。一作煩惱及身各獨在先理無因緣將欲立已自性。是故先難如來因緣之義。何意而然。若因緣不破自性不立為成已義故先難也。二作身及煩惱一時亦無因緣。三先後一時已下。明先後一時俱非因緣結為自性也。此人所以不斷善根者。乃可計乎。自性不無善惡故也。下所以先就大五明自性者。以斯五大是萬法之主善。若五大性實不從因緣一切萬法亦同五大自性而有也。如汝所言如五大諸法應如是義。不然者上納衣持立自性先難因緣。今如來亦然。得有因緣。先破自惱性也。云何說喻者。經如引如炎等。皆明諸無常流動。即體空寂故非自性也。汝意身為在先已下答初問。答意若我當說身在先汝可難意者。我若說身及煩惱各獨在先者。汝可作身先煩惱先難。汝亦同我身不在先者。汝納衣亦同。我身不在先。何因緣故。作身先之難也。身及煩惱俱無先後者。答初問中。第二意明身及煩惱。雖復俱時。得意煩惱成身而有因果。豈是自性也。汝意若謂身不在先已下。答初問中第三意。明理是因非自性也。若以身先無因緣故。名為無者。名為自性。無因緣者。汝不應說現在事中以蒲為席從縷出布。從埿出瓶等。一切法有因緣也。若意身先因緣我不見故。不說從埿出瓶等。現見事故我說為因緣者。汝今現見瓶。從埿因緣身先因緣亦爾。何不類解。汝上以五大類萬法皆是自性。今何不以瓶類於身先亦從因緣也。若意一切法悉有自性無因緣者。何因緣說五大者。汝何緣說大持名地大浸潤名水火燒名火大吹名風。若說大持等名地水等者。即是因緣也。五大因緣雖復如是者。次正義示之。五大雖後辯復五大名為生因緣生。色心及以無作耳。亦不應說心及無作諸法皆同五大作生因因緣生也。又云若意諸法悉是自性者。本是自性。何須以彼五大自性而類諸法故。意何因緣說於五大也。五大即因緣者。即以五大類諸法故。即亦是因緣也。亦可汝以五大自性類諸法是自性。今以諸法因緣緣類五大因是緣也。既難五大是因緣竟。五大雖復已下解正義。目前蘇臘胡膠於汝為地者。外人計此為香。香是地之求那故也。白鑞等於我為火者。外人計白鑞等有斯明色。色是火之求那故也。汝以非大水不凍凍時猶漯故名大者。若爾汝亦以非風不動水波。動時應名風。汝以雖後波動濕多名水。若爾凍時堅多應名地也 弘廣乃是大權菩薩晦迹。下愚為引無智故之託近念以扣大聖。欲令如來顯斯權道八正道已下。如來遠其意也。若問世邊無邊常爾不答者。陳如宣如來意若有斷或盡苦要明八聖。此論解佛意也。有感為說令所明道滅苦名為可放。機感未動不得設教令明道滅苦名為可遮。世尊知已者。一知阿難此土有緣有持經之德。二知阿難不能獨為諸魔作發心之緣要假文殊。三知阿難於須跋有緣故問所在也。然陳如尚能對佛彰於阿難不來之由。故知阿難善識魔說。豈為嬈亂。而所以不來者。示益故也。然為魔所嬈可有二意。一明此諸魔等應以此緣作發心之由。二明今日常住圓教必降異學。莫不摧伏故也。原魔嬈亂之意。聞佛後夜入於涅槃。阿難不到經無所付頹滅佛法。是故嬈亂不令詣佛也。變身異說者。魔知阿難姓好多聞故。變身異唱或亂其心令不速到也。解云。魔作此意者。此乃如來玄見諸魔發心時至故。以神力今生此意使發心有緣也。欲起欲語不從意者明此眾魔。要假阿難及以文殊乃發大志。文殊未至。阿難不能獨為作發心之緣。欲發起大心之於說法二皆不稱故言不從意也。為魔機感大心未發感事未發故言入羂。阿難獨自不能使前人發心為受大苦。雖念如來令遣文殊為發心之緣耳。文殊未來無能救者。文殊白佛此大眾中已下。此之問者欲彰阿難有時經之德遠使人生其深信。是以發問也。從諦聽以下。乃訖我今阿難亦復如是具足八法 此是如來顯明阿難有持經之德。以答文殊發問之意。此中言目連入定見如來心在於阿難。賢愚經云。阿那律入定見如來心心在阿難。各據一人也。是諸菩薩皆有重任訖下不能宣通十二部經。明菩薩大士隨宜化物不得專修經教。即是重任。此復寄菩薩重彰阿難有持經之德。或時能說人不信受者。大明菩薩隨緣應接或側迹下愚以接不逮而覩。形不及道者。未必信受。是以文言人不信受也。此下大意凡有二事不付菩薩。一以隨宜津導不得專持十二部經。二以降迹下愚人不信受。凡有二事應付阿難。一是吾弟人必信敬。二能專修十二部經持無漏失故。問其人欲合受持也。文殊亦到眾魔發心感機事發故。言即放阿難也。未捨憍慢者。此是增上慢。自所得非想之定。生涅槃想恃此涅槃增上之法而生慢也。其人愛心習猶未盡者。解云。須跋得八禪定伏離欲界七地煩惱。阿難過去作須跋子。亦見來命。即從上次第起亂還起欲界貪習愛子之結失禪定也。自下須跋有凡三計。一計報從過業不由現緣。二計現在苦行能破過業。三計非想以為涅槃。自下廣破依文可知耳。若有沙門等作如是言。眾生苦樂皆由往業者。此是慢人不欲受屈已實懷疑而乃假稱他人之說以問。如來明失則在他。是欲自攬其人起意如是故託他人也。其所計意。若有能於現在持戒受五熱等。苦懃行苦行償遇業盡不受苦報名為解脫。若不能苦行懷過業盡者。來身復續曾不生信。未來苦樂由現善惡乃言懷過業不盡。更受來苦可謂邪見也。佛言以下如來順其意故。亦不欲即相指片。是故復寄他人而生憐愍。而如來意其實正自憐愍須跋也。所以然者。以其須跋不識因果。又迷解脫故可憐愍。此漸摧須跋憍慢之心也。實作如是說不者。懼假他又恐謬傳故問以定故也。波若見答已下乃訖。皆由往曰本業因緣。此是假彼所執而答也。即是說其須跋所計也。我當復問實見過業不。若見過去應見現在。如其不見不應妄說。此明須跋愚之極也。若有是業為多少者。汝須跋若當實見過去業者。殺業有幾溢婬業等各有其幾。何者多何者少故言多少耶。能知是業已盡不盡者。現在苦行償往殺業溢婬等業為盡不盡耶。償殺等既盡。餘妄語諸業一切盡耶。此之問意明過去之業不可得。以苦行償盡也。彼若見答我實不知者。此明過業深隱唯佛乃窮。如是問時。須跋憒然莫識過去業多少盡以不盡故言我實不知也。譬如有人身被毒箭者。此復引喻以明。若不知過業多少盡以不盡不應說言現在苦行能壞過業也。毒箭喻過業醫藥者。喻現苦行身得安樂喻得解脫。汝若能識箭以醫藥知拔方法者。可名為知耳。汝既不識過業多少。對治方法云何。乃言現在苦行能壞過業得解脫耶。若過去有苦苦本償業業中之苦即償業盡。云何得受。今日之身苦現在苦行復以何破者。現在苦行即是其業。復以何苦而破也。能令現生報作無報不者。作不定報不。次下二句。皆就不定報名無無報也。是故先當調伏其心明。若受五熱等苦自餓之行乃是調身耳。若能修道斷除煩惱。是其調心也。心多喻林色陰唯一故喻於樹。從心生怖應先調心也。汝云何調伏心耶。若能明見真空無我永斷煩惱。又復能觀金剛已還是苦無常佛地是常樂者。乃可名為調伏心耳。汝今雖能暫伏麁想不能伏細非真調心。汝師不能斷非想處受於惡身。況其餘者況復汝也。此句為證非想之處非是涅槃破其所計也。云何能斷一切諸有者。明涅槃無為無有諸有聞上已師猶受惡身知不斷有非是涅槃。然外道興厭要假上伏下。而非想以上更無可假。是故問言。云何能斷一切有也。佛言已下。教作真空之觀。以其外道假上伏結緣有不觀空。是以勸觀也。言實想者。是觀空之惠。所以云惠者。以外人貴想故。作想名說其惠也。鑒空之惠體非是想。以惠為想故名為想。故言無想之想。觀空實而生為實想也。無自相他已下。廣明空境也。隨所滅處名真實想者。此結空惠也。一切諸法皆是假者。明金剛已還有是虛假假體即空。可謂假空故言一切皆是虛假。隨其滅處者。此明真諦常住真諦寂滅。下地有之。以無故言滅處也。是名為實者。結常住真諦也。是名實想者。結緣常真解也。
Every sutra has three sections: the introduction, the main body, and the part that transmits it to others. From the "Pure Offering" chapter up to the "Kashyapa" chapter, this is the main body of the sutra, which uses Eternal Cause and Effect as its core teaching. However, a sutra must inevitably be transmitted far and wide to benefit all beings. Therefore, from this point onward until the end of the sutra, it explains how to subdue heavenly demons and overcome heretics, ensuring that once the wheel of the Dharma is turned, no differing views or divergent teachings will arise. Since the great Dharma has now been established, this marks the third major section, the section on transmission.
Commentary: The earlier "Great Assembly's Questions" chapter reveals the present eternal nature, while the "Lion's Roar" and "Kashyapa" chapters reveal the eternal nature of the future. The current chapter brings these two eternal natures together into a single summary.
The sutra text follows this by explaining the path, the practice of the two truths, contemplation and understanding, the thirty-seven factors of enlightenment, and practices like the ten perceptions—these are the causes of liberation. Now, it reveals the result: the eternal five aggregates, which are the fruit of that liberation.
Another explanation: The appearance of the eternal result also depends on the inherent nature as the primary cause. Thus, it also connects to the eternal nature of the future and the eternal five aggregates. It can indeed be said to be a summary of the two eternal natures, which is why it appears next in the text.
The reason for addressing Kaundinya here is to show that the Tathagata has this kind of beginning and end, making him a truly great person. Furthermore, the time was right for the later ten sages to awaken their potential, and their connection lay with Kaundinya. Therefore, the Tathagata explains the eternal nature of the five aggregates to him, wanting him to grasp the entirety of the two teachings at the beginning and end. Then, he could entrust the ten sages to Kaundinya.
"As for Kaundinya, form is impermanent…" Explanation: This section is broadly interpreted in relation to the four noble truths as taught in this sutra. From the beginning, it addresses the truth of suffering, explaining the eternal five aggregates. Then, "Form is ignorance…" addresses the truth of origin, explaining the eternal five aggregates. It clarifies that form can generate the essence of the truth of accumulation, hence it is called "accumulation."
From "Form is not a refuge…" until the end, where it speaks of attaining the peaceful form of nirvana, this explains the ultimate truth of permanence, bliss, and the cessation of all phenomena. This is the true truth of cessation and the true refuge. Cessation and the path are of one substance, so there is no separate explanation for the path.
These four truths are taught to show that ordinary beings give rise to the three outflows and create the causes of accumulation. Therefore, their nature is suffering, emptiness, impermanent, non-self, and impure. The Tathagata, however, has long removed the three outflows and eradicated the dust of habit. Therefore, he has attained the true nature of permanence, bliss, self, and purity.
All heretics falsely make claims. The reason the Tathagata speaks these words is that the time had come for the heretics to awaken. He said these things to make them come with anger to debate, so that through the debate they would gain understanding.
"In the midst of this great assembly, he roared like a lion… You also roar like a lion." The teaching of the lion's roar has two meanings: first, to bring peace to its own kind; second, to awaken those who have been sleeping long. "If you can do this, your faith and understanding of the Dharma will long be stable and peaceful." Another explanation: it can enable those who have long been lost to find their way back. Therefore, you should proclaim the meaning of permanence and impermanence, so that those who hear it may attain a complete understanding.
The reason for first subduing the ten sages and various demons is the fear that after the Tathagata's passing, they would disturb the Dharma.
"As for going together to King Ajatashatru…" Commentary: According to the foreign custom of debate, one must first inform the king and obtain his permission. If he does not permit it, the debate stops.
"As for your dream…" The heretics, wishing to debate, asked for a dream that night. The dream said: "The land of the stupa has long been neglected." Having obtained the dream according to their wish, they spoke of this meaning, but it was not trustworthy. "A great three months can be increased or decreased…" This shows what is now verifiable and not a thing to be lightly regarded based on a dream. "Gautama only had the blessings of giving in the past and the power of his present mantras, which allowed him to do this. He truly has no wisdom. We have wisdom and should not be looked down upon by him."
"With these three intentions, O virtuous ones…" This shows that past events are unreliable. Instead, they should verify with present reality and know that there is benefit. Therefore, permission was granted.
"From nature, the Great One arises…" According to the *Shata-shastra*, this should mean: from nature arises awareness. Here, "the Great One" refers to what is considered the principle of awareness. "From the Great One, Ego arises"—this is what is considered the principle of the self. "From Ego arise sixteen principles": these are called earth, water, and so on. For the proper order, it should say: from Ego arise the five subtle particles; from the five subtle particles arise the five great elements; from the five great elements arise the sense faculties. If it were written in this sequence, it would be in order. As for the "mind as an equal base": these people believe that the mind is a material form (rupa) and is equal. It acts as the cause for the four great elements impartially, therefore it can equally perceive the five sense objects like form, sound, etc. These sixteen principles arise from the five principles. This passage can be said to be in proper order.
"The word 'dust' below should be the word 'gross' [coarseness]. Because anger, which is gross and moving, is the case." According to the *Shata-shastra*, there should be a fourth pair regarding the Lord of All (Ishvara). Here it is omitted.
"These twenty-five principles all arise from nature": it should correctly say "twenty-four principles arise from nature"; the text has a slight redundancy.
"These two statements are without duality": previously, teaching impermanence was to express the emptiness of inherent nature. Now, teaching permanence expresses that the wondrous beyond all forms is the true emptiness; the emptiness of the past and present, the empty and the non-empty, are non-dual.
"If each person has a self that pervades everywhere…": this would mean that within one body, many selves gather. This is incorrect. Furthermore, if the self is omnipresent, then the self of one person would leave no place for the self of another. This is different from ordinary things. Light and shadows can occupy the same room, so the self cannot be omnipresent in this way.
"In the objections in the city of the six…": if the self pervades everything, then it mixes with everything. Now the objection to Shrenika: if the self is pervasive, it should be the same agent in all actions, so why are actions different? He answers that the self pervades but does not act. Why is that? "When the self of one named Heavenly Virtue pervades to where the self of another, Buddha-Virtue, acts in goodness, the self of Heavenly Virtue is asleep and unconscious, so its divine potential does not operate, therefore it does not act in good. The self of Buddha-Virtue is also like this. It is not the doer of actions. Dharma and non-Dharma are not actions performed by the self."
"Also, this lamplight is at the wick's edge…": From here onwards, two arguments are used to refute the idea of a pervasive self. First, using non-pervasiveness to refute it: showing that light exists at the edge of the wick but does not exist within its core; in the same way, the self exists at the edge of dharma and non-dharma but does not exist within them. Because it does not exist within, it is not pervasive.
"If you think…": Second, using non-difference to refute it. Earlier, it was shown that light is different from the wick. Now it is shown that when the wick increases, the light is bright, and when the wick is withered, the light goes out. Therefore, one knows that light is not different from the wick, and the wick is not different from light. The three things—dharma, non-dharma, and the self—are then one. The intent is to refute from the principle of being neither one nor different. However, because Shrenika clung to difference, a non-difference argument was used temporarily to refute.
"This matter is inauspicious": Shrenika clung to his own nature, thinking "my view is inauspicious, the Buddha's view is also inauspicious." So why does he say that? The Tathagata earlier used the wick and light as an analogy for oneness. For Shrenika, the analogy did not work, but it seemed to apply for the Buddha, so he makes this remark that the Buddha is also inauspicious.
"The analogy I have drawn… now I teach you again." This shows that whatever the Tathagata teaches is not fixed. Therefore, in truth, he has no attachment. Because you were attached to difference, I taught oneness to show non-difference. If you become attached to the oneness, then I will teach difference to show that it is not one. I teach to free you from attachment; I myself have no attachment.
"If you think, 'The inauspicious is me, the auspicious is you,' then from this point onwards…": this verse then arises from that assumption. One thinks, "What is auspicious is for oneself, what is inauspicious is for others."
Purna holds the sixty-two views concerning permanence and impermanence. Regarding the present five aggregates, each aggregate has four statements, which makes twenty views concerning existence and non-existence. Regarding the future five aggregates, there are also twenty views concerning going and not going. Regarding the past five aggregates, there are another twenty views concerning whether the body and life are the same or different. Adding two more views related to sentient beings makes a total of sixty-two views.
Alternative interpretation: Holding sixteen views concerning permanence and impermanence (four views), existence and non-existence (four views), whether the body and life are the same or different (four views), and whether the soul after death goes or does not go (four views), making a total of sixteen views.
"The three realms are like a large village; the noble sages are like the sala forest; the Tathagata is like a single tree in the forest, going before things as the leader."
"The practitioner of conventional names is like the lord of the forest, which might also refer to the perfectly enlightened Buddha Dipamkara as the lord of the forest."
"Cultivating and tending at any time": this is a metaphor for self-cultivation and teaching others, broadly cultivating causes and helping conditions, and fulfilling all practices. "All burdens have disappeared forever, and the wondrous fruit abides eternally." This is a metaphor for old, withered things falling away, with only the true remaining. "Therefore it is called ignorance": cutting off the two causes of the past and removing the five causes of the present. "Newly named grasping and existence": this cuts off the three causes of the present, which are future birth and death.
The Bratya (heretic) puts forward three intentions in his question to the Tathagata: first, to know whether the self and other are same or different; second, to vex and disturb; third, to gain understanding. That is why he asks. The Tathagata saw that he was doing it to cause trouble, so he remained silent. Then the Bratya thought, "I am not trying to cause trouble; I am asking for understanding." The Tathagata saw his intention and encouraged him to ask.
The Nirgrantha (heretic) asserts that all dharmas have their own inherent nature. He makes eight statements in total.
In the first question, there are three intentions. First, he posits that afflictions and the body each exist on their own without any causal connection. He wants to establish his own theory of inherent nature. Therefore, he first challenges the Tathagata's principle of causality. Why so? If causality is not refuted, his theory of inherent nature cannot be established. So he challenges causality first to establish his own idea.
Second, he posits that the body and afflictions arise simultaneously without any causal connection.
Third, from the idea of "first, later, and simultaneous," he concludes that all things are without cause and are of their own inherent nature.
Why does this person not cut off his good roots? Because his concept of inherent nature does not exclude good and evil. That is why.
Now, why does he first discuss the inherent nature of the five great elements? Because these five great elements are the master of all dharmas. If the nature of the five great elements truly does not arise from causes, then all other dharmas must also have their own nature, just like the five great elements.
"As you say, like the five great elements, all dharmas should also be thus. This is not so." Earlier, the Nirgrantha established his theory of inherent nature by first attacking causality. Now the Tathagata must show that causality exists. So he first refutes the idea of an inherent nature that is troubled.
"How do you give a simile?" The sutra says that things are like mirages, all of which clearly show impermanence and flow. Their very essence is empty and still, therefore they are not "inherent nature" (svabhava).
"You think, 'Does the body come first?'" — the Tathagata uses this to answer the first question. The meaning of the answer is: if I were to say that the body exists first, then you could raise an objection. My position is that body and afflictions do not exist independently first. You would have the same position: body and afflictions do not exist first. What reason can you give to argue about "body first"?
"Body and afflictions both have no before and after": this answers the second intention of the first question. It clarifies that although body and afflictions arise together, afflictions can become the cause for the body. This is a cause-and-effect relationship; so how can it be "inherent nature"?
"You think, 'If the body does not exist first...'": this answers the third intention of the first question. It clarifies that the principle here is about causes and inherent nature.
"If you say that because the body has no prior cause, it is called 'nothingness,' and you call that nothingness 'inherent nature' without a cause, then you should not say that in present phenomena from bulrush comes mat, from thread comes cloth, from clay comes pot. All dharmas have causes."
"If you think the cause before the body does not exist, [so you argue], but you do not say that from clay comes a pot; yet it is an evident phenomenon: I say there is a cause. You now see that a pot comes from clay. The prior cause of the body is also like that. Why don't you make the same kind of interpretation? You earlier used the five great elements to class all dharmas as 'inherent nature.' Why do you not now use the pot to class the prior cause of the body as also conditional? If you think all dharmas have inherent nature and no cause, then why do you speak of 'the five great elements'? For example, you say: the quality of holding is called earth; of moistening, water; of heat, fire; of blowing, wind. Saying such things is already speaking of conditions."
Even though the five great elements are described in that way, [the Tathagata now offers the correct teaching]. The five great elements, even when re-described as the five great elements, are said to be produced by generative causes, producing form, mind and non-intentional dharmas [as a general assertion is inaccurate]. One should also not say that mind and non-intentional dharmas are all produced from the five great elements as generative cause.
Furthermore, if a person says that all dharmas are inherent nature, then they are originally inherent nature, so why need one classify all dharmas using the inherent nature of the five great elements? Thinking thus, why does one mention "the five great elements" at all?
The five great elements are conditional: if one uses the five great elements to categorize all dharmas, then all dharmas are also conditional.
Having already refuted the idea that the five great elements are inherent nature, now the correct meaning is now clarified. In practical terms, "sulaju" (type of gum resin) and "hulu glue" (type of varnish) are earth from your perspective: outsiders (heretics) consider these as fragrance, and fragrance is a quality of earth. "White wax etc." is fire from my perspective: outsiders consider white wax etc. to have that bright color. Color is a quality of fire. "You say it is not great water unless it does not freeze. When it freezes it is moist. Hence, you call it 'great one.'" If so, you also say it is not wind [proper] unless it does not move and does not wave. When water-waves or movement occurs, it should be called wind. You say that even though it is moving, it is expressed as moistening and its name is water. Then if it were solid in its frozen state, it should be called "earth."
"Vast and expansive indeed! These are the great Bodhisattvas, who hide their tracks. The inferior and stupid, to guide the ignorant, rely on their near presence to invoke the great Sage, wishing the Tathagata to reveal this method of skillful means. The Eightfold Noble Path" — by this, the Tathagata saw their intention far away.
"If asked about the world being bounded or boundless, permanent or not, the answer is 'no':" This is Kaundinya expressing the Tathagata's intention. If one has ceased, or else brought suffering to an end, one must cultivate the Eightfold Noble Path. This text explains the Buddha's intention. This principle can also be interpreted according to the understanding of "responsive influence." In this context, "having sense awareness" and being "taught with conditions" allows the Buddha to explain the Path, the Cessation, and the Suffering, because they are "appropriate for release." When potential recipients have not yet been moved by conditions, one cannot set up teachings. Then it is called "appropriate to block." So what is taught through the Path, Cessation, and Suffering is "release block."
"The World-Honored One knew": first, he knew that Ananda had a connection with this land and had the quality of maintaining the sutra; second, he knew that Ananda alone could not create the conditions for all the demons to generate aspiration, and would need to borrow Manjusri’s help; third, he knew that Ananda had a connection with Subhadra, so he asked about his whereabouts.
Since Kaundinya was able to reveal to the Buddha the reason for Ananda's absence, it is understood that Ananda was fully aware of Mara's teaching. So why would he be troubled by Mara? Yet, the fact that he did not come was meant to be beneficial.
The disturbance by Mara could have two meanings: first, to show that these demons will use these conditions as a reason to generate aspiration; second, to show that now the [true] eternal and perfect teaching will definitely subdue heterodox teachings; none [of them] will fail to be subdued. The original intention of Mara’s disturbance was: hearing that the Buddha would enter Nirvāṇa in the later part of the night,
大涅槃經義記卷第四
Commentary on the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, Volume 4
大統五年六月十三日寫訖流通末代也
Completed writing on the thirteenth day of the sixth month of the fifth year of the Datong era, to be circulated in future generations.