法華經義記 3.23

3.23

"At that time the World-Honoured One addressed Śāriputra: 'Since you have now earnestly requested three times, how could I not speak?'" From this point down to the end of the Chapter on the Bestowal of Prophecy on Learners and Non-learners, comprising seven and a half chapters of the sūtra, explains four sections of the fundamental sūtra in the causal stage. What follows here is the third, the detailed exposition unfolding the three to reveal the one, severing doubts and generating faith. In the request above there were two kinds of doubts: first, doubting why the Tathāgata praised the two knowledges; second, self-doubt regarding the dharma they themselves had attained. Now the Tathāgata only answers the second doubt; the second doubt having departed on its own, it requires no separate answer. Furthermore, this third [part] is precisely an elaboration of the initial first section of the previous chapter, which briefly unfolded the three to reveal the one, shook attachments, and generated doubts. Previously it was also explained that the first and second sections are each divided into two, while the third and fourth are each divided into three. Here, as for there being three tiers in resolving the third doubt, this means transforming persons of the three capacities through three sections: First, from "Since you have now earnestly requested three times" onwards down to the second fascicle, ending at "May whatever meritorious deeds I have done, whether in this life or past lives, and the merit of seeing the Buddha all be dedicated to the Buddha path"—this is designated the exposition by dharma that unfolds the three and reveals the one, transforming persons of superior capacity such as Śāriputra. Second, from "At that time Śāriputra said to the Buddha: 'World-Honoured One! I now have no further doubts or regrets, having personally received the prophecy of supreme enlightenment before the Buddha'" through to the end of the Chapter on Bestowal of Prophecy, comprising four chapters—this is designated the exposition by parable that unfolds the three and reveals the one, transforming persons of middling capacity such as the four great disciples, Kāśyapa, Subhūti, and the others. Third, from the Chapter on the Apparitional City through to the end of the Chapter on the Bestowal of Prophecy on Learners and Non-learners, comprising three chapters—this is designated the exposition of past-life conditions that unfolds the three and reveals the principle of one convergence, transforming persons of inferior capacity such as Pūrṇa and the others. Thus, persons of superior capacity hear the exposition by dharma of the meaning of the three and the one, and immediately understand the principle of one convergence; persons of middling capacity, upon hearing the meaning of the three and the one a second time, can awaken to the principle of one convergence; and persons of inferior capacity, only after hearing it explained three times, finally understand that in the one convergence there is no distinction of three. However, within the exposition by dharma there is also the sense of exposition by parable, as in the udumbara flower. There is also the sense of exposition of past-life conditions, namely the words: "Formerly, in the presence of two billion buddhas, I constantly taught and transformed you." Although there is an exposition by parable, the fundamental main idea was to praise the rarity of the Dharma, and therefore it cannot be designated a [proper parable]; although there is an exposition of past-life conditions, this merely confirms the awakening attained by persons of superior capacity, and in recounting these ancient conditions the fundamental main idea was not properly one of conditions. Within the second [section], the exposition by parable, there is also the sense of exposition by dharma and the sense of past-life conditions; hence it says below, "All that has been spoken was for the sake of teaching and transforming bodhisattvas," which is the sense of exposition by dharma. Yet because the phrasing is brief, it is insufficient to trigger awakening in persons of middling capacity. From within the recounting of the conditions between father and son, referring to the former prajñā assembly where it was already said that he showed him the gold and silver, this is the sense of exposition of past-life conditions; however, this meaning is not present in the primary parable itself. The assembly having already attained awakening from the primary parable, these words only appear in the poor son's expression of understanding, not in a primary exposition of past-life conditions. Within the exposition of past-life conditions there is also the sense of exposition by dharma: namely, the beginning of the Chapter on the Apparitional City clarifies the signs of supernormal movements in the era of the previous buddha, where the Brahmās of the ten directions requested the turning of the wheel of the Dharma—this is exposition by dharma. Furthermore, the words "Just as if five hundred yojanas..." are an exposition by parable; although this is proclaimed, when tracing its origin it is fundamentally only to clarify the meaning of past-life conditions. How is this known? Furthermore, at the end of the Chapter on Bestowal of Prophecy on the Four Great Disciples it says: "The past-life conditions between me and you—I shall now explain them, listen carefully!" That is, it again explains to persons of inferior capacity that in ancient times [the Buddha] had already transformed them through the Mahāyāna. Below it also says: "I, being the sixteenth, previously took turns preaching for you; by virtue of these fundamental conditions I now preach the Lotus Sūtra." The main idea is that only upon hearing this exposition of past-life conditions could they attain understanding; hence it is an exposition of past-life conditions. Why is there a difference among persons of the three capacities, with their understanding occurring earlier or later? Setting aside the teaching and discussing the principle: how could arhats who have completely severed the active fetters of the three realms and attained the three knowledges and six supernormal powers be entirely ignorant of the principle of one convergence and the lack of distinction among the three? Moreover, the Nirvāṇa Sūtra itself states: "If a person does not know the three refuges as one single essence and permanently abiding, they do not even attain [the fruit of] a śrāvaka, pratyekabuddha, or bodhisattva, much less will they attain unsurpassable awakening. If one does not know that the Buddha is permanently abiding, then the four faiths will not be accomplished and the five faculties will not be established." Furthermore, the Śrīmālā Sūtra itself says: "The initial undertakings of the three vehicles are not deluded about the Dharma." It also says: "Śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas know for themselves that they abide in the stage with remainder, and must certainly attain unsurpassable awakening." Discussing it in terms of principle, how could the holy ones of the three vehicles adhere to the three vehicles as definitive, assert that they are distinct, and fail to understand the one convergence? If so, why are there śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas? These persons themselves knew that there was a buddha fruition to be sought; it was merely that their own resolve was weak, being unable to renounce head, eyes, marrow, and brain to generate a mind of vast salvation, so they temporarily acted as śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas to tame and save themselves. Instances of this kind are truly existent. Yet, that Śāriputra was of superior capacity in the assembly while Pūrṇa and the others were of inferior capacity—if one speaks of their actual practice, they all practiced the hidden bodhisattva practice internally while outwardly manifesting as śrāvakas. The reason there are these three kinds of faith, understanding, and awakening is that they all matched the condition of the external ordinary persons of shallow knowledge, who adhered to the former distinct teachings of the three vehicles or the meaning of one convergence. Therefore the Tathāgata acted in these three ways: initially, when the exposition by dharma was completed, those of sharp capacity among the external ordinary persons attained understanding, and Śāriputra manifested as sharing that understanding; when the exposition by parable was completed, those of middling capacity among the external ordinary persons attained understanding, and Subhūti and the others likewise manifested as sharing that understanding; and when the past-life conditions were completed, those of inferior capacity among the external ordinary persons attained awakening, and Pūrṇa and the others manifested as sharing that understanding. If one sets aside principle and discusses the teaching, even those who have fully attained arhatship possess this adherence. Furthermore, if one synthesises principle and teaching to discuss the distinction of the three capacities: among external ordinary persons there are two kinds of people. There is one kind of person who is easily swayed, like the stage of the light feather explained in the Pañcaviṃśati; and there is another kind of person who genuinely wishes to progress. Now, taking only those who genuinely wish to progress, their capacities are sharp or dull, resulting in three kinds. Since there are three kinds, they are all due to the depth or lightness of past conditioning: they use principle to confuse the teaching, or sometimes use the teaching to confuse principle; hence it is said that they hesitate between principle and teaching, and thus their reception of awakening has an earlier and a later. Those of sharp capacity have much attachment to principle and little doubt toward the teaching; those of dull capacity have much attachment to the teaching and little doubt toward principle; and those of middling capacity are equally confused by the teaching and bewildered by principle. Those who have much attachment to principle and little doubt toward the teaching say: the principle of non-arising is one, and the knowledge of non-arising that contemplates it equally should be identical; since this person attaches to principle as being one, why did the Tathāgata say there are distinct destinations for the three vehicles, stating that there are distinctions among the three fruitions? This is doubting the teaching. Those of dull capacity who have much attachment to the teaching and little doubt toward principle say: since the Buddha's teaching states that there are differences among the three causes and three fruitions, why must the principle of non-arising contemplated by the three vehicles be the same? This is much attachment to the teaching and little doubt toward principle. Those of middling capacity sometimes attach to principle and are confused by the teaching, saying: since the principle is one, how can the teaching say it is different? Sometimes they attach to the teaching and doubt principle, saying: since the Buddha's teaching has three, why must the principle be the same? This is equal attachment to and doubt toward both teaching and principle. Attaining the path and becoming a sage must proceed from seeing the principle; therefore, those of sharp capacity who attach more to principle conform with principle, and hence upon hearing the exposition by dharma once, they immediately awaken to the single principle without the distinction of three. Those who have much attachment to the teaching and little doubt toward principle do not accord with principle; hence, only after hearing it explained three times do they awaken to the principle of the One Vehicle without the distinction of three. Those who are equally attached to principle and teaching occupy the middle position; upon hearing it a second time, they attain understanding. However, as for generating doubts over this principle and teaching, learners and non-learners alike have it. Furthermore, there are those who attach to the teaching and doubt the fruition, and these also have three kinds: those of sharp capacity have much attachment to the fruition and little doubt toward the teaching; those of dull capacity have much attachment to the teaching and little mind doubting the fruition; and persons of middling capacity are equally attached to fruition and teaching. As for the fruition, it is merely the nirvāṇa of extinction. Those of sharp capacity who have much attachment to the fruition and little doubt toward the teaching observe principle for themselves with clear wisdom, seeing that residual habit-energies still remain; knowing that their severing of defilements is not yet complete, how could they contemplate that future bodies are entirely extinguished? This is having much attachment to the fruition and little doubt toward the teaching. Those of dull capacity who have much attachment to the teaching and little doubt toward the fruition say: since it is said that the conscious spirit can be extinguished, the Buddha's words are not false—how could I dare not have faith and accept it? This is much attachment to the teaching; yet they do not know whether the path of the conscious spirit is truly extinguished or not—this is having little doubt toward the fruition. Persons of middling capacity either attach to the fruition and doubt the teaching, or attach to the teaching and doubt the fruition. However, those who generate doubt over this fruition are exclusively non-learners. Although there are these three kinds of doubtful attachments, the unfolding of the three to reveal the one is identical; when the exposition of the Dharma is completed, they equally attain awakening and understanding, differing only in the sequence of the text.