妙法蓮華經玄義 10.26

10.26

次難第四時同歸教，正是收束萬善，入於一乘，不明佛性，神通延壽，前過恒沙，後倍上數，亦不明常。此不應爾。《法華》明一種性相，一地所生，其所說法，皆悉到於一切智地，命章即云：「開示悟入佛之知見。」《華嚴》明佛智慧，猶帶菩薩智慧，菩薩智慧如爪上土，如來智慧如十方土。《法華》純說佛之智慧如十方土，而非常者，《華嚴》爪上土，云何明常住？又《華嚴》始坐道場，初成正覺，成佛太近。《法華》明成佛久遠，中間今日皆是迹耳。迹中所說而言是常，本地之教豈不明常？又《無量義經》云：「說華嚴海空歷劫修行，未曾宣說如是甚深無量義經。」甚深《無量義經》已自甚深，甚深之經為《法華》弄引，豈不明常？若言常住語少者，如天子一語，可非勅耶？文云：「世間相常住」，又云：「無量阿僧祇劫，壽命無量，常住不滅。」伽耶城壽命及數數示現等，是應佛壽命；阿僧祇壽命無量者，是報佛壽命；常住不滅者，是法佛壽命也。三佛宛然，常住義足。《法華論》云：示現三種菩提：一者、應化佛菩提：隨所應見而為示現，謂出釋氏宮，去伽耶城不遠，坐道場得三菩提也。二、報佛菩提：謂十地滿足得常涅槃。文云：「我實成佛已來，無量無邊百千萬億那由他劫也。」三、法佛菩提：謂如來藏性淨涅槃，常清淨不變。文云：「如來如實知見三界之相……不如三界，見於三界。」謂眾生界即涅槃界；不離眾生界，即如來藏。又云：「我不敢輕於汝等。汝等皆當作佛。」即正因佛性。又云：「為令眾生開佛知見」，即了因佛性。又云：「佛種從緣起」，即緣因佛性。《法華論》亦明三種佛性。論云：唯佛如來證大菩提，究竟滿足一切智慧，故名大。言：「我不敢輕於汝等汝等皆當作佛」者，示諸眾生皆有佛性也。經論明據，云何言無？又《涅槃》云：「是經出世，如彼果實，多所利益安樂一切，能令眾生見如來性，如法華中八千聲聞得受記莂，成大果實，如秋收冬藏，更無所作。」若八千聲聞於《法華》中不見佛性，《涅槃》不應懸指，明文信驗，何勞苟執？又《涅槃》二十五云：「究竟畢竟者，一切眾生所得一乘，一乘者名為佛性。以是義故，我說一切眾生悉有佛性，一切眾生悉有一乘。」故今經是一乘之教，與涅槃玄會。且《涅槃》猶帶三乘得道，此經純一無雜；《涅槃》更不發迹，此經顯本義彰。處處唱生，處處現滅，未來常住，三世益物，人眾見燒，我土不毀，豈是神通延壽有滅盡耶？破神通延壽義（云云）。

Next, I challenge the fourth-period teaching of 'common convergence' [i.e., the Lotus Sūtra], [which they claim] merely gathers together the myriad goods into the eka-yāna without clarifying the buddha-nature, and that [its mention of] extending life through supernatural powers—surpassing the sands of the Ganges before and doubling that number after—likewise does not clarify permanence. This cannot be so. The Lotus Sūtra clarifies a single nature and characteristic, born of a single ground, and that the teachings it expounds all reach the ground of omniscient knowledge (sarvajñatā-bhūmi). In opening its discourse, it immediately states, 'to open, show, awaken, and enter the vision and knowledge of the Buddha.' The Avataṃsaka clarifies the Buddha's wisdom, yet it still entails the wisdom of bodhisattvas, where the bodhisattvas' wisdom is like the earth on a fingernail and the Tathāgata's wisdom is like the earth of the ten directions. The Lotus Sūtra purely expounds the Buddha's wisdom like the earth of the ten directions; if it were not permanent, then how could the 'earth on a fingernail' of the Avataṃsaka clarify eternal permanence? Furthermore, the Avataṃsaka has him newly sitting at the bodhimaṇḍa and newly attaining true awakening, which places his attainment of buddhahood too close [in time]. The Lotus Sūtra clarifies that his attainment of buddhahood was long ago, and that the intervening events as well as today are merely traces. If what was expounded in the traces is said to be permanent, how could the teaching of the original source not clarify permanence? Moreover, the Anantanirdeśa-sūtra says: 'Though I expounded the ocean-like emptiness of the Avataṃsaka and practice through kalpas, I had not yet proclaimed such a profound Anantanirdeśa-sūtra.' The profound Anantanirdeśa-sūtra is already exceedingly profound, and this profound sūtra serves as a prelude to the Lotus Sūtra; how could it not clarify permanence? If they say that words about eternal permanence are sparse, is a single word of the emperor not an edict? The text says, 'The characteristics of the world are eternally abiding'; and further says, 'For immeasurable asaṃkhyeya kalpas, life is immeasurable, eternally abiding and unperishing.' The lifespan at Gayā city and the frequent appearances are the lifespan of the response buddha (nirmāṇa-kāya); the immeasurable lifespan of asaṃkhyeyas is the lifespan of the reward buddha (saṃbhoga-kāya); and 'eternally abiding and unperishing' is the lifespan of the dharma buddha (dharma-kāya). The three buddhas are fully present; the meaning of eternal permanence is complete. The Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa says: It manifests three kinds of bodhi: First, the bodhi of the response-transformation buddha: manifested in accordance with what ought to be seen, referring to leaving the palace of the Śākyas, going not far from Gayā city, sitting at the bodhimaṇḍa, and attaining sambodhi. Second, the bodhi of the reward buddha: referring to fulfilling the ten grounds and attaining eternal nirvāṇa; the text says, 'Since I actually achieved buddhahood, it has been immeasurable, boundless hundreds of thousands of myriads of koṭis of nayutas of kalpas.' Third, the bodhi of the dharma buddha: referring to the inherently pure nirvāṇa of the tathāgatagarbha, which is eternally pure and unchanging; the text says, 'The Tathāgata truly sees and knows the characteristics of the triple world... not as the triple world sees the triple world.' This means that the realm of sentient beings is identical to the realm of nirvāṇa; not separated from the realm of sentient beings, it is the tathāgatagarbha. It also says, 'I dare not disrespect you, for you will all become buddhas'—this is the direct-cause buddha-nature. It also says, 'In order to cause sentient beings to open the vision and knowledge of the Buddha'—this is the revealing-cause buddha-nature. It also says, 'The seeds of buddhahood arise from conditions'—this is the conditioning-cause buddha-nature. The Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa also clarifies three kinds of buddha-nature. The treatise says: Only the Buddha, the Tathāgata, realizes great bodhi, completely fulfilling all wisdom, and therefore it is called great. The statement 'I dare not disrespect you, for you will all become buddhas' reveals that all sentient beings possess the buddha-nature. With such clear evidence in sūtra and treatise, how can they say it is absent? Moreover, the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra says: 'The appearance of this sūtra in the world is like that fruit, bringing great benefit and peace to all, able to make sentient beings see the nature of the Tathāgata, just as in the Lotus Sūtra the eight thousand śrāvakas received vyākaraṇa, bringing forth the great fruit, like harvest in autumn and storage in winter, with nothing further to be done.' If the eight thousand śrāvakas did not see the buddha-nature in the Lotus Sūtra, the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra would not have referred back to it. The explicit text is reliable evidence; why labor to cling stubbornly? Furthermore, fascicle twenty-five of the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra says: 'That which is ultimate and definitive is the eka-yāna attained by all sentient beings; the eka-yāna is called the buddha-nature. For this reason, I say that all sentient beings fully possess the buddha-nature, and all sentient beings fully possess the eka-yāna.' Thus, the present sūtra is the teaching of the eka-yāna, which profoundly accords with the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra. Furthermore, the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra still entails the three vehicles attaining the Way, whereas this sūtra is pure and unmixed; the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra does not further disclose the traces, whereas this sūtra reveals the original source and its meaning is manifest. Proclaiming birth everywhere, manifesting extinction everywhere, eternally abiding in the future, benefiting beings throughout the three periods of time; when the multitude sees it burned, my land is not destroyed—how could this be an extension of life through supernatural powers that has an exhaustion? This refutes the idea of extending life through supernatural powers (and so forth).