法華經義記 3.2

3.2

「爾時世尊而說偈言」，因歎二智髣髴開宗中有二，長行與偈頌，此下是第二正明偈頌，但且長行中本二，一者寄言以歎二智、二者明寄絕言歎二智。今者十七行半偈亦分為二：第一有四行偈正頌上寄言歎二智，第二從「如是大果報」下有十三行半偈頌寄絕言歎二智。但上長行寄言歎二智中本有二，一者將欲歎釋迦二智，故先歎諸佛二智；二者正歎釋迦二智。此兩雙中各有三重：第一正歎二智、第二釋、第三結也。今者四行偈頌之為體亦分為二：初兩行偈併疊頌諸佛釋迦正歎二智，後兩行復併疊頌諸佛釋迦釋二智，結二智兩重也。又就兩偈疊頌諸佛釋迦正歎二智中，前偈頌諸佛二智，後偈頌釋迦二智也。但上歎諸佛二智中，先歎實智後歎權智，然先嘆實智中有二句：初舉智體言「諸佛智慧」，第二句正歎言「甚深無量」。後歎權智有三：先舉智體言其智慧門，第二正歎言難解難入，第三出不知眾，言一切聲聞辟支佛所不能知也。今者「世雄不可量」一句，即得併頌實智權智各二句，「諸佛智慧甚深無量」、「其智慧門難解難入」等也。諸佛應同十方此則世義，降四魔伏外道是雄義，權實二智非下人所測故言不可量也。「諸天及世人一切眾生類無能知佛者」下三句頌上權智，下第三句出不知眾，上言一切聲聞辟支佛所不能知也。且今用此一偈頌前長行凡有四種不同：上長行中別歎實智與方便智，今此偈中合頌權實二智，一不同；上當體歎權實二智，今此偈中舉人歎二智，二不同；上明不知人唯繫在權智下，今此偈中頌出不知人雙繫二智下，三不同；上長行中出不知人唯出聲聞、緣覺二人，今此偈中廣出人、天、聲聞、緣覺，遠及菩薩，併出五乘人都是不知眾，四不同。何如此不同耶？解釋者言：「此義亦微，有所以有。上長行中所以二智別歎者，則明義用異，但此二智只是聖人神解涉用為義，從機曲說未若權智，但此權智應有所出，是故先別歎實智是權家之本，後歎權智是智，是本家之末，是故權實互歎，此明用有勝負。偈中合頌者，此明二智雖有權實二名，照然則體一更無異也。是故《維摩經》言：十方世界有若干也，其無礙慧無若干也。復言上當體歎二智者，明此經本意故，故當體歎偈中明二智所成人，故舉人總歎二智也。復言上出不知人唯繫權智下，今此偈中雙繫二智下者，上宜鄙斥二人智慧狹劣，雖稟昔日權智之教不能究了，為是義故，上出不知人偏繫權智下。而今偈中雙繫二智下者，明此二乘非直不解權智之用、實智冥然莫測，是故雙繫二智下。復言上長行唯出二乘至偈頌中言一切眾生類無能知佛者，廣出五乘人者，此為釋物疑情，但今日之教本為斥二乘封執之情，是故長行偏對二乘，但于時時眾謂言二智止是二乘不解，自二乘之外應有解者。是故偈中言非唯二乘不解此權實之理，人天及菩薩亦復不解。如此頌類舉可知也。」

"At that time the World-Honoured One spoke in verse, saying": within praising the two wisdoms and vaguely opening the central tenets, there are two [parts]: the prose and the verse. What follows is the second [part], which properly explains the verse. However, the prose originally had two [parts]: first, relying on words to praise the two wisdoms, and second, clarifying reliance on the transcendence of words to praise the two wisdoms. Now, the seventeen and a half lines of verse are also divided into two: first, there are four lines of verse properly summarizing the above praise of the two wisdoms relying on words; second, from "Such great fruits and retributions" downward, there are thirteen and a half lines of verse summarizing the praise of the two wisdoms relying on the transcendence of words. But within the above prose praising the two wisdoms relying on words, there were originally two [parts]: first, wishing to praise Śākya's two wisdoms, he therefore first praised the two wisdoms of all buddhas; second, he properly praised Śākya's two wisdoms. Within each of these two pairs, there are three layers: first, properly praising the two wisdoms; second, the explanation; and third, the conclusion. Now, the substance of the four lines of verse is also divided into two: the first two lines of verse concurrently and repeatedly summarize all buddhas' and Śākya's proper praise of the two wisdoms, and the latter two lines again concurrently and repeatedly summarize all buddhas' and Śākya's explanation of the two wisdoms, concluding the two wisdoms in two layers. Moreover, regarding the two lines of verse that repeatedly summarize all buddhas' and Śākya's proper praise of the two wisdoms, the former line summarizes all buddhas' two wisdoms, and the latter line summarizes Śākya's two wisdoms. However, in the above praise of all buddhas' two wisdoms, he first praised the real wisdom and afterwards praised the expedient wisdom. Furthermore, within first praising the real wisdom, there were two phrases: first, raising the substance of the wisdom, saying "the wisdom of all buddhas"; the second phrase properly praised it, saying "is profound and measureless". Afterwards, in praising the expedient wisdom, there were three [points]: first, raising the substance of the wisdom, saying "the gate of its wisdom"; second, properly praising it, saying "is difficult to understand and difficult to enter"; third, pointing out the assembly who do not know, saying that "all śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas are unable to know it". Now, the single phrase "The Hero of the World is immeasurable" is able to concurrently summarize two phrases each of the real wisdom and the expedient wisdom: "the wisdom of all buddhas is profound and measureless" and "the gate of its wisdom is difficult to understand and difficult to enter", and so forth. All buddhas adapting to be identical throughout the ten directions is the meaning of "World"; subduing the four Māras and conquering non-Buddhists is the meaning of "Hero"; the two wisdoms, expedient and real, cannot be fathomed by inferior persons, hence it says "immeasurable". The following three phrases, "All devas and humans, / and all species of living beings, / none are able to know the Buddha", summarize the above expedient wisdom, and the third line below points out the assembly who do not know, where the above stated that all śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas are unable to know it. Now, using this one line of verse to summarize the previous prose, there are altogether four differences: in the prose above, it separately praised the real wisdom and the wisdom of skilful means, whereas in this verse, it combines and summarizes the two wisdoms, expedient and real—this is the first difference. Above, it praised the two wisdoms, expedient and real, in terms of their substance, whereas in this verse, it raises the person to praise the two wisdoms—this is the second difference. Above, it clarified that the persons who do not know were tied solely under the expedient wisdom, whereas in this verse, summarizing and pointing out the persons who do not know, they are doubly tied under both wisdoms—this is the third difference. In the prose above, pointing out the persons who do not know, it pointed out only two persons, the śrāvaka and the pratyekabuddha, whereas in this verse, it broadly points out humans, devas, śrāvakas, and pratyekabuddhas, reaching as far as bodhisattvas, collectively pointing out that the persons of all five vehicles are the assembly who do not know—this is the fourth difference. Why are there these differences? Commentators say: "This meaning is subtle, but there is a reason for its presence. As for why in the prose above the two wisdoms were praised separately, this clarifies that their meaning and function differ; but these two wisdoms are merely the sage's spiritual understanding engaging in functional application as meaning; when following capacities with curved explanations, it is not yet like expedient wisdom. However, this expedient wisdom must have an origin; therefore, it first separately praised real wisdom as the root of the expedient, and afterwards praised expedient wisdom as wisdom being the branch of the root. Therefore, expedient and real are mutually praised, which clarifies that functions have superiority and inferiority. In the verse, combining and summarizing them clarifies that although the two wisdoms have the two names 'expedient' and 'real', in luminous illumination their substance is one and no different. Therefore, the *Vimalakīrtinirdeśa Sūtra* says: 'The worlds of the ten directions are manifold, but their unhindered wisdom is not manifold.' Furthermore, in saying that above it praised the two wisdoms in terms of their substance, this is because of clarifying the original intent of this sūtra, hence praising them in terms of their substance; in the verse, clarifying the person who is accomplished by the two wisdoms, it therefore raises the person to comprehensively praise the two wisdoms. Furthermore, in saying that above, pointing out the persons who do not know was tied solely under expedient wisdom, whereas in this verse they are doubly tied under both wisdoms: above, it was appropriate to disparage and reprimand the wisdom of the two persons as narrow and inferior, for although they received the teaching of expedient wisdom in the past, they were unable to investigate it thoroughly; for this reason, pointing out the persons who do not know above was partial to being tied under expedient wisdom. Yet now in the verse, doubly tying them under both wisdoms clarifies that these two vehicles not only fail to understand the function of expedient wisdom, but real wisdom is also obscure and unfathomable [to them]; therefore, they are doubly tied under both wisdoms. Furthermore, in saying that the prose above pointed out only the two vehicles, while in the verse it says 'all species of living beings, / none are able to know the Buddha', broadly pointing out the persons of the five vehicles: this is to resolve the doubts of sentient beings. For today's teaching was originally to reprimand the clinging attachments of the two vehicles, hence the prose was directed partially toward the two vehicles; but at that time the assembly thought that the two wisdoms were not understood merely by the two vehicles, and that outside of the two vehicles there must be those who understand them. Therefore, the verse says that not only do the two vehicles fail to understand this principle of expedient and real, but humans, devas, and bodhisattvas also do not understand it. These classes of verse can be understood by extension in this way."