法華經義記 1.107

1.107

所以《無量義經》為《法華》作遊序者，凡有兩家解。一家解言：「此經明無量萬善同歸，皆成佛道之義，故名無量義經也。但《法華》所明正言無二無三，會三歸一，然《無量義經》直明萬善成佛，不言無二無三破三歸一，與《法華》有異，是故得有《法華》作遊序。」第二家言：「《無量義經》明無生空理不可邊量往求，故名無量，即此空是萬有之義也。是則《大品》、《維摩》亦明無相空義，何故不為此經作序？伊家通言居然如此，前明三乘後明一乘，此是真序，更欲何覓？」解釋者言：「五時次第不無此義，但執義之家好序太過。今明為《法華》之序，正明一時一坐一部經教各自有序，何異五時之教皆有序、正、流通？今明《無量義經》猶是堪聞《法華》徒眾聞此經，但未說《法華》之前仍說《無量義經》。《大品》、《維摩》雖明無相空義，猶言三家行因為量，三乘得果不同；然《無量義經》言：『夫行善者皆得佛果』，是故有異《大品》、《維摩》；又直言萬善成佛，不明會三歸一，是故復異《法華》。既居兩過之間，是故得為《法華》作序也。此經是大乘教，故言為諸菩薩說大乘經，是佛所重，故言佛所護念也。即用此經表必說《法華》，即是相義。又有密報之能，即是瑞義也。」

Regarding why the *Anantanirdeśa Sūtra* serves as an introductory prelude to the *Lotus Sūtra*, there are altogether two schools of interpretation. One school explains: 'This sūtra clarifies the meaning that immeasurable myriad goods converge together, all completing the Buddha path; therefore it is named the *Anantanirdeśa Sūtra*. However, what the *Lotus Sūtra* clarifies specifically states that there are neither two nor three, converging the three into the one; whereas the *Anantanirdeśa Sūtra* directly clarifies that the myriad goods achieve Buddhahood without stating that there are neither two nor three to dismantle the three and return to the one. Being different from the *Lotus Sūtra*, it can thus serve as an introductory prelude to the *Lotus Sūtra*.' The second school says: 'The *Anantanirdeśa Sūtra* clarifies that the unarisen principle of emptiness cannot be delimited or measured when pursued; therefore it is called immeasurable (ananta), and this emptiness is the meaning of the myriad existents. If so, the *Pañcaviṃśati* and the *Vimalakīrti* also clarify the meaning of markless emptiness; why do they not serve as a preface to this sūtra? That master broadly replied that it is clearly like this: first clarifying the three vehicles and later clarifying the One Vehicle, this is the true preface; what more would one seek?' The commentator says: 'The order of the five periods is not without this meaning, but those masters who cling to doctrine are overly fond of prefaces. We now clarify that as a preface to the *Lotus Sūtra*, it directly clarifies that each particular time, single seat, and single body of canonical teaching has its own preface; how is it different from the teachings of the five periods, which all have preface, main text, and dissemination? Now we clarify that the *Anantanirdeśa Sūtra* was heard by this assembly who were still capable of hearing the *Lotus Sūtra*, but before expounding the *Lotus Sūtra*, [the Buddha] still expounded the *Anantanirdeśa Sūtra*. Although the *Pañcaviṃśati* and the *Vimalakīrti* clarify the meaning of markless emptiness, they still state that the causal practices of the three schools are distinct measures, and that the three vehicles obtain differing fruits; however, the *Anantanirdeśa Sūtra* says: "All who practice good obtain the Buddha fruit." Therefore it differs from the *Pañcaviṃśati* and the *Vimalakīrti*. Furthermore, it directly states that myriad goods achieve Buddhahood without clarifying the convergence of the three into the one, and for this reason it also differs from the *Lotus Sūtra*. Situated between these two positions, it can therefore serve as a preface to the *Lotus Sūtra*. This sūtra is a Great Vehicle teaching, hence it says "expounded the Great Vehicle sūtra for the sake of the bodhisattvas"; it is revered by the Buddhas, hence it says "protected and remembered by the Buddhas". Using this sūtra to indicate the certainty of expounding the *Lotus Sūtra* is the meaning of a sign. Also having the efficacy of concealed recompense is the meaning of an auspicious omen.'