妙法蓮華經玄義 10.75

10.75

次、引《無量義》為證者：文云：「我以佛眼觀一切法，不可宣說。所以者何？諸眾生性欲不同。」性欲不同，種種說法，文辭是一而義別異，義異故眾生解異，解異故得法、得果、得道亦異。初說四諦為求聲聞人，而八億諸天來下聽法，發菩提心。中於處處說甚深十二因緣，為求支佛人。次說方等十二部經、摩訶般若、華嚴海空，宣說菩薩歷劫修行，而百千比丘、無量眾生發菩提心，或住聲聞，萬億人天得須陀洹，至阿羅漢，住辟支佛。「佛眼觀一切法」，即是頓法在前，四諦、十二緣即是次漸。若依此文，說三藏竟，次說方等十二部經。所以次小說大者，佛本授大，眾生不堪，抽大出小，令斷結成聖，雖有此益，非佛本懷。次說《方等》、《維摩》、《思益》、《殃掘摩羅》，彈訶小乘保果之僻，譏刺三藏斷滅之非。故身子、善吉，齊教專小，初不曾聞大乘威德，或茫然棄鉢，或怖畏却華，不知是何言，不知以何答。然方等彈斥教在三藏之後，被訶之時應在十二年前。何以得知？皆追述昔訶，驗是前事。何者？前已稟教得道，證於無學，荷佛恩深，心相體信，不復恚怒。自昔至今，恣殃掘之譏、任淨名之折，得為恥小慕大之益，喻如烹酪作生蘇，即此義也。按《無量義》，得知方等是三藏之後，為第三時教也。

Next, citing the Immeasurable Meanings [Sūtra] as evidence: the text says: 'With the buddha-eye I observe all dharmas as inexpressible. Why is this? Sentient beings' natures and desires are different.' Because their natures and desires are different, he preached the Dharma in various ways; while the phrasing is the same, the meanings are distinct; because the meanings are distinct, sentient beings' understandings are distinct; because their understandings are distinct, their attainment of the Dharma, attainment of the fruit, and attainment of the path are also distinct. Initially, he preached the four truths for those seeking to be śrāvakas, yet eight hundred million devas descended to hear the Dharma and generated the bodhi-mind. In the middle, in various places he preached the profound twelve links of dependent origination for those seeking to be pratyekabuddhas. Next, he preached the Vaipulya twelve divisions of scriptures, the Mahāprajñā, and the ocean-emptiness of the Avataṃsaka, expounding the bodhisattvas' cultivation through kalpas, yet hundreds of thousands of monks and immeasurable sentient beings generated the bodhi-mind, or remained as śrāvakas, while myriads of millions of humans and devas attained stream-enterer up to arhat, or remained as pratyekabuddhas. 'Observing all dharmas with the buddha-eye' refers to the sudden Dharma being prior; the four truths and twelve links are the subsequent gradual. According to this text, after preaching the tripiṭaka, he next preached the Vaipulya twelve divisions of scriptures. The reason he preached the great after the small is that the Buddha originally imparted the great, but sentient beings could not bear it, so he withdrew the great and brought forth the small, causing them to sever defilements and become holy; although there was this benefit, it was not the Buddha's original intention. Next, he preached the Vaipulya, Vimalakīrti, Viśeṣacintā, and Aṅgulimāla sūtras, rebuking the perversity of the Hinayāna clinging to the fruit, and ridiculing the error of the tripiṭaka's annihilation. Therefore Śāriputra and Subhūti, constrained by the teaching, were devoted to the small, having never heard the majesty of the Mahāyāna; they either discarded their almsbowls in daze or brushed off flowers in fear, not knowing what was said, not knowing how to reply. However, although the Vaipulya teaching of reproach came after the tripiṭaka, the time they were rebuked should be before the twelve years. How is this known? They all retrospectively recount past reproaches, verifying that these were earlier events. Why? Having previously received the teaching and attained the path, realizing the stage of non-learning, they were deeply indebted to the Buddha's grace; their minds trusted each other, and they were no longer resentful. From the past to the present, they allowed Aṅgulimāla's ridicule and submitted to Vimalakīrti's reproof, obtaining the benefit of being ashamed of the small and aspiring to the great—just as cooking coagulated milk produces curd, which is this very meaning. Based on the Immeasurable Meanings, we know that the Vaipulya is after the tripiṭaka, being the teaching of the third period.