法華玄義釋籤 2.15

2.15

次引同中二：初總結同，次引文別釋。初言「當知華嚴之譬與涅槃義同」者，《華嚴》日出等譬與《涅槃》五味義同，但有廣略之殊，故廣開平地以為三譬，譬三味也。次引文證同中言「三子三田三馬」等者，《涅槃》「迦葉白佛：如來憐愍一切眾生，不調能調、未脫能脫，善星是佛菩薩時子，斷欲界結，證得四禪，如來何故記說是一闡提，地獄劫住不可治人？何不先為演說正法後為菩薩？若不能救善星比丘，云何得名有大慈悲有大方便？佛言：善男子！譬如有人唯有三子，一者有信順心，恭敬父母；利根智慧，於世間事能悉了知。其第二子無信順心，不敬父母；利根智慧，於世間事能悉了知。其第三子不敬父母，無信順心；鈍根無智。父母教告應先教誰？迦葉白佛：應先初、次及第二、後及第三。而彼二子雖無信順恭敬之心，以慈念故次復教之。如來亦爾，其三子者先譬菩薩、次譬聲聞、後譬闡提，如脩多羅中微細之義，我先已為諸菩薩說，淺近之義為聲聞說，世間之義為闡提說。今雖無益，作後世因。善男子！譬如三田：一者渠流便易，無諸沙鹵瓦石棘刺，種一得百；二者雖無沙鹵瓦石棘刺，渠流嶮難，收實減半；三者渠流嶮難，多諸沙鹵，種一得一。又有三器：一者完，二者漏，三者破。若受用時先用何器？又有三病人，一者易治，二者難治，三者不可治。醫師若治先治何者？又有三馬，一者調壯大力，二者不調大力，三者不調羸老。王若行時先乘何馬？合譬如前。善男子！如大師子，若殺香象，則盡其力，乃至殺兔亦盡其力。如來亦爾，為諸菩薩及一闡提，功用無二。」故今文中，初說華嚴如先為菩薩，次在鹿苑如為聲聞，方等已後大小普被，乃至涅槃名為平等。故《涅槃》云「功用無二」。經文雖列多種三譬，譬意不別，重列來耳。日光無私，高者先照，後及平地非不照高，從後為言故云平地。涅槃亦爾，佛智無偏，大機先被，後及闡提，通前後說故云平等。三料簡中，初問「既以五味那同稱漸」者，問前五味教相味既有五，何故中間三味皆名為漸？答意者，秖以漸入故有中間，更加前後故得有五。

Next, in citing similarities, there are two parts: first, a general conclusion of the similarities; second, citing the text to explain them individually. First, as for saying "one should know that the metaphor of the Avataṃsaka shares the same meaning as the Nirvāṇa," the Avataṃsaka's metaphors of the sunrise and so on share the same meaning as the Nirvāṇa's five flavors, differing only in being expansive or concise; hence it expansively opens the level ground to make three metaphors, illustrating the three flavors. Next, in citing text to substantiate the similarity, as for saying "three sons, three fields, three horses," and so on: The Nirvāṇa states: "Kāśyapa addressed the Buddha: 'The Tathāgata pities all sentient beings: those untamed he can tame; those unliberated he can liberate. Sunakkhatta was the son of the Buddha when he was a bodhisattva; he severed the fetters of the desire realm and attained the four dhyānas. Why did the Tathāgata predict that he is an icchantika, an incurable person who will dwell in hell for an eon? Why did he not first expound the true Dharma for him and afterward for the bodhisattvas? If he cannot save the monk Sunakkhatta, how can he be called one who possesses great compassion and great expedients?' The Buddha said: 'Good son! Suppose a person has only three sons: the first has faith and obedience, respecting father and mother; of keen faculties and wisdom, he fully understands worldly affairs. The second son has neither faith nor obedience and does not respect father and mother; yet of keen faculties and wisdom, he fully understands worldly affairs. The third son does not respect father and mother, has neither faith nor obedience, and is of dull faculties and without wisdom. When the parents instruct, whom should they instruct first?' Kāśyapa addressed the Buddha: 'They should first instruct the first, next the second, and last the third; and though those two sons lack faith, obedience, and respect, out of loving thought they instruct them next. The Tathāgata is also like this: the three sons illustrate first the bodhisattvas, next the śrāvakas, and last the icchantikas. Just as with the subtle and profound meanings in the sūtras, I have already expounded them first for the bodhisattvas, the shallow and accessible meanings for the śrāvakas, and worldly meanings for the icchantikas. Although there is no benefit now, it creates causes for future lives. Good son! Suppose there are three fields: the first has convenient irrigation channels and is free of sand, saline soil, tiles, stones, and thorns; sowing one yields a hundred. The second, though free of sand, saline soil, tiles, stones, and thorns, has perilous and difficult irrigation channels; the harvest is reduced by half. The third has perilous and difficult irrigation channels, with much sand and saline soil; sowing one yields one. Again, there are three vessels: the first is intact, the second leaks, and the third is broken. When putting them to use, which vessel is used first? Again, there are three sick persons: the first is easy to cure, the second is difficult to cure, and the third is incurable. If a physician treats them, which does he treat first? Again, there are three horses: the first is well-trained, robust, and of great strength; the second is untrained but of great strength; the third is untrained, emaciated, and old. When a king goes forth, which horse does he ride first?' The application of the metaphors is as before. 'Good son! Just as a great lion, when killing a fragrant elephant, exerts its full strength, and even when killing a hare also exerts its full strength, the Tathāgata is also like this: for the bodhisattvas and the icchantikas, his efficacy and function are not two.'" Therefore in the present text, first preaching the Avataṃsaka is like first acting for the bodhisattvas; next in the Deer Park is like acting for the śrāvakas; from the Vaipulya onward both great and small are universally accommodated, up to the Nirvāṇa, which is called impartiality. Hence the Nirvāṇa says, "efficacy and function are not two." Although the sūtra text lists multiple kinds of three metaphors, the intent of the metaphors is not different; they are merely listed repeatedly. The sun's light is without partiality: the high is illuminated first, and reaching the level ground afterward does not mean it ceases to illuminate the high; speaking from the sequence, it is called the level ground. The Nirvāṇa is also like this: the Buddha's wisdom is without bias; great capacities are accommodated first, and it reaches the icchantikas afterward; speaking comprehensively of before and after, it is called impartiality. In the third section, the evaluation, first, as for the question, "Since there are five flavors, why are they alike called gradual?": it asks, regarding the previous teaching-aspects of the five flavors, since the flavors are five, why are the middle three flavors all named gradual? The intent of the answer is that solely because of gradual entry there is the middle; adding the before and after, there can be five.