法華玄義釋籤 18.30

18.30

三明諸經同異者，若不辨因果，將何以明此經妙宗？於中三：初雙標，次雙釋，後雙結。釋中二：先釋迹，次釋本。初文中三：初通為諸經宗，次「大品」下別示其同相，因果既通而為宗者，名隨事立。三「是為」下總結。初如文。次明別示中二：初通辨諸部因果，次「諸經」下辨諸部中因果不同。初又三：初《大品》，次《淨名》，次《華嚴》。初《大品》中二：初立宗，次引叡師證。初又二：初正立宗以顯別，次「故云」下明具因果以辨通。初文二：初正立，次「般若」下示宗相。次言「通」者，二文俱有因果，意在於因，般若是因，薩婆若是果。次引叡師證中又二：初立因果，次「文中」下證。次《淨名》中言「寶積具問因果」者，《淨名．序》中云：「爾時寶積說偈已，白佛言：是五百長者子，皆發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提心，願聞得佛國土清淨」，問果也。「唯願世尊為諸菩薩說於如來淨土之行」，問因也。「佛言：隨所化眾生而取佛土」，化眾生，答因也；而取佛土，答果也。又下文云：「直心是菩薩淨土」，答因也。「菩薩成佛時」，答果也。次《華嚴》者，大同《淨名》。次諸經因果不同中，若顯諸部中諸教因果，而諸經別故，故須此文分別以顯同異。此中又二：初對部，次對味。三總結，如文。

Third, regarding clarifying the similarities and differences among the various sūtras: if one does not distinguish cause and effect, with what could one clarify the subtle central theme of this sūtra? Within this are three parts: first, positing both; second, explaining both; and finally, concluding both. In the explanation, there are two: first, explaining the traces; next, explaining the origin. In the first text, there are three parts: first, generally serving as the central theme for the various sūtras; second, from the 'Large Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra' downward, separately showing their shared characteristics—since cause and effect are general and serve as the central theme, it is named in accordance with the circumstances; third, from 'this is' downward, the general conclusion. The first is as in the text. Next, in clarifying the separate indications, there are two parts: first, generally distinguishing the cause and effect of the various divisions; second, from 'the various sūtras' downward, distinguishing the differences of cause and effect within the various divisions. The first also has three: first the Large Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra, next Vimalakīrti, and next the Avataṃsaka Sūtra. In the first, the Large Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra, there are two parts: first, establishing the central theme; second, citing Master Sengrui as evidence. The first also has two: first, directly establishing the central theme to reveal the distinct; second, from 'therefore it says' downward, clarifying the possession of cause and effect to distinguish the general. The first text has two: first, directly establishing; second, from 'prajñā' downward, showing the characteristics of the central theme. Next, stating 'general': both texts possess cause and effect; the intention lies in the cause—prajñā is the cause, and sarvajñā is the effect. Next, in citing Master Sengrui as evidence, there are again two: first, establishing cause and effect; second, from 'in the text' downward, the evidence. Next, in Vimalakīrti, stating 'Ratnakūṭa fully inquires into cause and effect': in the Preface of the Vimalakīrti, it says: 'At that time, after Ratnakūṭa spoke the verses, he said to the Buddha: "These five hundred elders' sons have all generated the aspiration for anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhi, and wish to hear of attaining the purity of the Buddha's land"'—this inquires into the effect. '"We only wish the World-Honoured One will explain the practice of the Tathāgata's pure land for the sake of the bodhisattvas"'—this inquires into the cause. 'The Buddha said: "In accordance with the sentient beings to be transformed, one takes the Buddha land"'—transforming sentient beings answers the cause; taking the Buddha land answers the effect. Moreover, a later passage says: 'The straight mind is the bodhisattva's pure land'—this answers the cause. 'When the bodhisattva accomplishes buddhahood'—this answers the effect. Next, the Avataṃsaka Sūtra is largely the same as Vimalakīrti. Next, in the differences of cause and effect in the various sūtras: if revealing the cause and effect of the various teachings within the various divisions, because the various sūtras are distinct, this passage is needed to differentiate them in order to reveal similarity and difference. Within this are again two: first, relative to the divisions; second, relative to the flavors. Third, the general conclusion is as in the text.