法華經義記 6.51

6.51

「如來說法一相一味」此下是第二，合不自知譬。就此合中自有五重：一者先出所不知法；二者正合不知；三者形釋不知，舉如來知諸法形釋二乘不知；四者舉不知外譬帖合；五者還用如來知結合也。今言「如來說法一相一味」下，先出所不知之法自有二，此句作兩章門：「一相」者，無為果章門；「一味」者，有為章門。明如來昔日所說三乘之法，始終同得一無為一有為之果，故言一相一味也。第二釋，先釋無為章門有三句，「所謂解脫相」此句正明因果盡處兩種無為，下二句別明，「離相」明因盡，「滅相」明果亡也。「究竟至於一切種智」者，釋有為果章門也。「其有眾生聞如來法」此下是第二，正合二乘人不自知也。「所以者何？唯有如來知此眾生」，此下是第三舉如來知形釋二乘不知，作三階，第一「唯有如來知此眾生」下，正明如來知眾生根性，即是知病義。第二「念何事」下，明如來知應根性所須之法，即是識藥。何者？故如四諦十二因緣等，乃至待處待伴種種入道不同也。第三「眾生住於種種之地」下，還舉眾生根性不同，總結如來知病識藥也。今者第一「知眾生種相體性」者，明如來知三乘種別不同、表相亦異、利鈍體殊、習性非一也。第二明知眾生根性所須法者，大論眾生心用不出三慧，故舉三慧以明所須之法不同。就中自有四階，初「念何事、思何事、修何事」此三句，正明所須境界不同、入道各異也。第二「云何念、云何思、云何修」此三句，由眾生現在修行方法不同也。第三「以何法念、以何法思、以何法修」此三句，明現在行家過去因不同也。第四「以何法得何法」此二句，明現在行家未來果亦不定。若好作文時，以何法念得何法？以何法思得何法？以何法修得何法？但文句雖略，以義可推也。「眾生住於種種之地」下是第三，總結如來知病識藥明了無礙也。「如彼卉木叢林」以下，合不自知譬中第四舉不知外譬帖合也。「如來知是一相」此下第五，舉如來知結合也。

From "the Dharma taught by the Tathāgata has one characteristic and one flavour" onward is the second part, applying the parable of not knowing for oneself. Within this application there are five layers: first, setting forth the Dharma that is not known; second, directly applying the not-knowing; third, explaining the not-knowing through contrast, adducing the Tathāgata's knowledge of all dharmas to contrast and explain the two vehicles' lack of knowledge; fourth, adducing the external parable of not knowing to match and apply; fifth, returning to using the Tathāgata's knowledge to conclude. Now, from "the Dharma taught by the Tathāgata has one characteristic and one flavour" onward, first setting forth the Dharma that is not known has two aspects; this sentence serves as two chapter headings: "one characteristic" is the chapter heading for the unconditioned fruit; "one flavour" is the chapter heading for the conditioned [fruit]. It clarifies that the Dharma of the three vehicles taught by the Tathāgata in the past from beginning to end identically attains one unconditioned and one conditioned fruit; therefore it is said to have "one characteristic and one flavour". Second is the explanation: first, explaining the unconditioned chapter heading has three phrases. The phrase "namely, the characteristic of liberation" directly clarifies the two kinds of unconditioned at the exhaustion of causes and effects; the next two phrases clarify them separately: "the characteristic of dispassion" clarifies the exhaustion of causes, and "the characteristic of cessation" clarifies the cessation of fruits. "Ultimately reaching omniscience" explains the chapter heading of the conditioned fruit. From "sentient beings who hear the Tathāgata's Dharma" onward is the second part, directly applying to the two vehicles' people not knowing for themselves. "Why is this? Only the Tathāgata knows these sentient beings": from this point on is the third part, adducing the Tathāgata's knowledge to contrast and explain the two vehicles' lack of knowledge, divided into three steps. First, from "only the Tathāgata knows these sentient beings" onward, it directly clarifies that the Tathāgata knows the capacities and natures of sentient beings, which is the meaning of knowing the illness. Second, from "what they reflect upon" onward, it clarifies that the Tathāgata knows the dharmas needed in response to their capacities and natures, which is recognizing the medicine. Why? For instance, the four truths, twelve links of dependent origination, and so forth, down to awaiting the place, awaiting companions, and the various differences in entering the path. Third, from "sentient beings abiding in various stages" onward, it returns to adducing the differences in sentient beings' capacities and natures to conclude generally that the Tathāgata knows the illness and recognizes the medicine. Now, first, "knowing sentient beings' types, characteristics, substances, and natures" clarifies that the Tathāgata knows that the types of the three vehicles differ, their external characteristics are also distinct, their sharpness and dullness of substance are different, and their habitual natures are not one. Second, regarding knowing the dharmas needed by sentient beings' capacities and natures: in broad discussion, the mental activities of sentient beings do not go beyond the three wisdoms; hence the three wisdoms are adduced to clarify the differences in the needed dharmas. Within this there are four steps: first, the three phrases "what they reflect upon, what they contemplate, what they cultivate" directly clarify that the required cognitive objects are different and their entries into the path vary. Second, the three phrases "how they reflect, how they contemplate, how they cultivate" [clarify that this is] due to the differences in the methods of practice in the present by sentient beings. Third, the three phrases "by what dharma they reflect, by what dharma they contemplate, by what dharma they cultivate" clarify that the past causes of practitioners in the present differ. Fourth, the two phrases "by what dharma they obtain what dharma" clarify that the future fruits of practitioners in the present are also not fixed. If written out fully: by what dharma of reflection does one obtain what dharma? By what dharma of contemplation does one obtain what dharma? By what dharma of cultivation does one obtain what dharma? Although the phrasing is brief, it can be inferred from the meaning. From "sentient beings abiding in various stages" onward is the third step, concluding generally that the Tathāgata knows the illness and recognizes the medicine clearly and without obstruction. From "like those plants, trees, thickets, and forests" onward is the fourth part in the application of the parable of not knowing for oneself, adducing the external parable of not knowing to match and apply. From "the Tathāgata knows this one characteristic" onward is the fifth part, adducing the Tathāgata's knowledge to conclude.