法華玄義釋籤 19.13

19.13

四明校量中二：先引〈法師品〉與一代校量，次「將說」下以疑請文與諸經校量。初文可知。次文中二：先明與諸經一向異，次唯華嚴與法華經廣辨同異。初文中「三止四請」者，〈方便品〉初佛止歎云：止舍利弗！不須復說。次舍利弗騰眾心請；次佛止云：止止不須復說，恐驚疑故。二舍利弗騰宿根利，是故復請；三佛復止舍利弗護增上慢故。三舍利弗復騰宿慧益多，是故更請；四如來許說，四身子願聞。「亦無疑網」等者，餘經雖亦有請有止，不同此經三乘四眾天龍咸有疑請，致請為往、佛止為復，皆至於三，名為殷勤。「說諸方等，觀文可知」者，且如說《方等陀羅尼》時，初敘雷音比丘為九十二億魔之所掩蔽，華聚菩薩請佛救護，佛便許以摩訶袒持調伏彼魔，後說滅罪脩行方法。如說《淨名》，初因命問疾述昔被彈，文殊承旨，廣論因疾調伏慰喻，此等諸文由問疾生，已下諸文，次第而起，不云再請，何況至三？「說大品時，猶酬梵請」者，如《大品》中，如來自敷師子之座，入王三昧，身分次第放於六百萬億光明，放光明已，復入師子遊戲三昧，現神變已，令無量人各各謂佛獨為我說，十方世界亦復如是。此中無請，仍用梵王初通請竟，是故此說猶酬梵王。所言「猶」者，佛初成道，梵王初請，請意既遠，鹿苑方等未稱梵心，故至般若尚酬初請。故知三請，唯獨法華，驗不虛矣。

Fourth, in explaining the comparison, there are two parts: first, citing the 'Dharma Teacher Chapter' to compare [this sūtra] with [the teachings of the Buddha's] entire lifetime; next, from 'about to preach' onward, using the passages on doubting and requesting to compare [it] with the various sūtras. The first text is understandable. In the next text, there are two parts: first, explaining how it is completely different from the various sūtras; next, extensively differentiating the similarities and differences solely between the Avataṃsaka and the Lotus Sūtra. In the first text, regarding the 'three stoppages and four requests': at the beginning of the 'Expedient Means Chapter', the Buddha stops [Śāriputra's praise] and remarks: 'Stop, Śāriputra! There is no need to speak further.' Next, Śāriputra speaks on behalf of the assembly's intent and requests [him to speak]; next, the Buddha stops [him], saying: 'Stop, stop, there is no need to speak further, for fear of startling and causing doubt.' Second, Śāriputra puts forward that their past roots are sharp, and therefore requests again; third, the Buddha stops Śāriputra again, out of concern for protecting those of overweening pride. Third, Śāriputra again puts forward that their past wisdom has brought much benefit, and therefore requests once more; fourth, the Tathāgata consents to preach, and Śāriputra desires to hear it for the fourth [time]. Regarding 'nor is there a web of doubts' and so forth: although other sūtras also have requests and stoppages, they are not like this sūtra, in which the three vehicles, the four assemblies, and devas and nāgas all harbor doubts and make requests. Making a request constitutes going forward, and the Buddha stopping constitutes coming back; both reaching three times is called earnest. Regarding 'when the various Vaipulya [sūtras] were preached, it can be known by examining the texts': as when the Vaipulya Dhāraṇī was preached, it initially recounts that the bhikṣu Leiyin was obscured by ninety-two hundred million māras, and Bodhisattva Huaju requested the Buddha to rescue and protect [him]; the Buddha then promised to use the mahādaṇḍi to subdue those māras, and afterward taught the methods of eradicating sins and cultivating practice. As when Vimalakīrti was preached, it initially arose from being ordered to inquire after his illness and recounting being reproached in the past; Mañjuśrī received the directive and extensively discussed subduing and consoling on account of the illness. Passages such as these arose due to inquiring after an illness, and the subsequent passages arose successively, without mentioning a second request, let alone reaching three. Regarding 'when the Large Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra was preached, it was still in response to the request of Brahmā': as in the Large Perfection of Wisdom Sūtra, the Tathāgata arranged his own lion seat, entered the king of samādhis, and sequentially emitted six hundred trillion rays of light from his body; having emitted the light, he entered the lion-sport samādhi again, and having displayed supernatural transformations, caused immeasurable people each to think that the Buddha was preaching solely for them, and so it was throughout the worlds of the ten directions. In this there was no request; it merely relied upon the initial comprehensive request already made by King Brahmā, and therefore this preaching was still in response to King Brahmā. The word 'still' means: when the Buddha first attained the Way, King Brahmā made the initial request; since the scope of that request was far-reaching, the Deer Park and Vaipulya did not yet satisfy Brahmā's wish, so when reaching Prajñā it was still responding to the initial request. Therefore, we know that the three requests belong uniquely to the Lotus Sūtra; the evidence is not hollow.