妙法蓮華經玄義 10.33

10.33

次難北地五時義。若言《提謂》說五戒十善者，彼經但明五戒不明十善，唯是人教，則非天教。縱以此為人天教者，諸經皆明戒善，亦應是人天教耶？又彼經云：「五戒為諸佛之母，欲求佛道讀是經，欲求阿羅漢讀是經。」又云：「欲得不死地，當佩長生之符，服不死之藥，持長樂之印。」長生符者，即三乘法是。長樂印者，即泥洹道是。云何獨言是人天教耶？又云：五戒天地之根、眾靈之源，天持之和陰陽，地持之萬物生，萬物之母，萬神之父，大道之元，泥洹之本。又四事本，五陰、六衰本，四事即四大，四事本淨，五陰本淨，六衰本淨，如此等意，窮元極妙之說，云何獨是人天教耶？又提謂長者得不起法忍，三百人得信忍，二百人得須陀洹，四天王得柔順法忍，龍王得信根，阿須輪眾皆發無上正真道意，觀此得道，豈是人天教耶？復次，《釋論》結集法藏，初從波羅奈至泥洹夕，凡所說小乘法，結為三法藏；從初生至雙樹，凡說大乘，結為摩訶衍藏；奈苑之前，不預小乘攝。何者？爾時未有僧寶，故不應用《提謂》為初教也。若言《提謂》是祕密教、一音異解者，不應在顯露之初。餘四時同南家，已如前破（云云）。

Next, I critique the Northern theory of five periods. If it is said that the Trapuṣa-sūtra expounds the five precepts and ten virtues, that sūtra only clarifies the five precepts and does not clarify the ten virtues; being purely a teaching for humans, it is not a teaching for devas. Even if one takes this to be a teaching for humans and devas, all sūtras clarify precepts and virtues—should they also be teachings for humans and devas? Furthermore, that sūtra says: 'The five precepts are the mother of all buddhas; one who wishes to seek the buddha-way should read this sūtra, and one who wishes to seek arhatship should read this sūtra.' It also says: 'One who wishes to attain the deathless realm should wear the talisman of long life, ingest the medicine of deathlessness, and maintain the seal of perpetual bliss.' The talisman of long life is the teaching of the three vehicles; the seal of perpetual bliss is the way of nirvāṇa. Why say exclusively that it is a teaching for humans and devas? It also says: 'The five precepts are the root of heaven and earth, the source of all spirits; heaven preserves them to harmonize yin and yang, and earth preserves them so that the myriad things are born; they are the mother of the myriad things, the father of the myriad spirits, the origin of the Great Way, and the source of nirvāṇa.' Furthermore, they are the root of the four elements, the root of the five skandhas and six declines. The four elements are the four great elements; the four elements are fundamentally pure, the five skandhas are fundamentally pure, and the six declines are fundamentally pure. With meanings such as these, expounding that which exhausts the origin and reaches the utmost profundity, why would it be merely a teaching for humans and devas? Moreover, the elder Trapuṣa attained the acquiescence in the non-arising of dharmas, three hundred people attained the acquiescence of faith, two hundred people attained the stage of srotāpanna, the Four Heavenly Kings attained the gentle and compliant acquiescence in dharmas, the dragon kings attained the faculties of faith, and the host of asuras all aroused the aspiration for unsurpassable, true, and correct enlightenment. Observing this attainment of the way, how could it be merely a teaching for humans and devas? Furthermore, when the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa discusses the compilation of the Dharma collections, from the initial deer park up to the night of nirvāṇa, all the Hīnayāna teachings expounded were compiled into three Dharma piṭakas; from the initial birth up to the twin trees, all Mahāyāna expounded was compiled into the Mahāyāna-piṭaka. What preceded the deer park was not included within the Hīnayāna. Why? At that time the Saṅgha jewel did not yet exist. Therefore, one should not use the Trapuṣa-sūtra as the initial teaching. If it is said that the Trapuṣa-sūtra is an esoteric teaching where a single voice was differently understood, it should not stand at the head of the manifest teachings. The remaining four periods are identical to those of the Southern masters, which have already been refuted above (and so forth).