法華玄義釋籤 2.19

2.19

「雖高山頓說」等者，正釋也。又三：初正釋，次「大經」下引證，三「一時」下破古。初文者，此指華嚴不動不離而升而遊者，此指頓後漸初不動於頓而施漸化。此中古人多有異釋，有云本釋迦不動而化身升天；有云法身不動而化用升天；有云不往而往、往而不往故升故往。近代藏法師四釋：一約處，一處中有一切處，則天宮本來在樹王下，但先未用此天宮處。二者約佛，樹王下佛遍一切處，故樹王佛本在天宮，先未用彼天宮佛耳。三者約時，樹王下時即天宮時。四者約法界，謂無自性。此未必全爾。前之三義何不論機而但約佛，後約法界何故但云無自性耶？而不云無他乃至無無因耶？無謀而化感應道交，非應而應非感而感，何論時處身土性等耶？雖轉四諦指鹿苑，此指雖施漸化而不起於頓，此二味既然，諸味準此。雖為菩薩指方等般若彼二時中俱有小果，新得舊得如常所明。雖五人證果，不妨八萬諸天獲無生忍，此重指漸初對般若說。前文約法，此中約人，得果不同、證法不定，應引《大論》顯密法輪義釋此中意，故《大論》六十五云「於閻浮提，見第二法輪轉，初轉法輪八萬諸天得無生忍，陳如得初果。今轉法輪無量諸天得無生忍，今轉似初轉。」

As for "Although suddenly preached on the high mountain..." and so on, this is the main explanation. It also has three parts: first, the main explanation; second, from "the Great Sūtra" downward, citing proof; third, from "at one time" downward, refuting the ancients. In the first text: this refers to the Avataṃsaka's ascending and roaming without moving and without leaving; this refers to the beginning of the gradual following the sudden, not moving from the sudden while enacting the gradual conversion. Here the ancients had many differing explanations: some said the original Śākyamuni did not move while the transformation body ascended to heaven; some said the dharma body did not move while the transformational function ascended to heaven; some said ascending and going by not going and yet going, going and yet not going. Master Zang of recent times had four explanations: First, in terms of place: within one place are all places; thus the heavenly palace was originally beneath the king of trees, but previously this heavenly palace location had not been utilized. Second, in terms of the Buddha: the Buddha beneath the king of trees pervades all places; thus the Buddha beneath the king of trees was originally in the heavenly palace, and previously that heavenly palace Buddha had simply not been utilized. Third, in terms of time: the time beneath the king of trees is precisely the time in the heavenly palace. Fourth, in terms of the dharma realm: meaning lack of intrinsic nature. This is not necessarily completely so. In the former three meanings, why does he not discuss capacities but only speak in terms of the Buddha? In the latter, in terms of the dharma realm, why does he only speak of lack of intrinsic nature, and not speak of lack of otherness or even lack of causelessness? Transforming without deliberation, sympathetic resonance connects: responding without response, evoking without evoke—what need is there to discuss time, place, body, land, nature, and so forth? "Although turning [the wheel of] the four truths" refers to the Deer Park; this indicates that although enacting the gradual conversion, it does not depart from the sudden. These two flavors being so, the other flavors follow this. "Although for the bodhisattvas" refers to the Vaipulya and the Prajñā; in those two periods both have small fruits, newly attained and previously attained, as normally explained. "Although five persons realize the fruit, it does not hinder eighty thousand devas from obtaining the patience of non-arising": this again refers to the beginning of the gradual in contrast to the Prajñā. The former text was in terms of teachings; here it is in terms of persons: the fruits attained are different, and the Dharmas realized are indeterminate. One should cite the Da zhidu lun's meaning of the manifest and secret wheels of the Dharma to explain the intent here. Thus the Da zhidu lun, fascicle sixty-five, says: "In Jambudvīpa, one sees the turning of the second wheel of the Dharma. At the first turning of the wheel of the Dharma, eighty thousand devas attained the patience of non-arising, and Ājñāta-Kauṇḍinya attained the first fruit. Now turning the wheel of the Dharma, immeasurable devas attain the patience of non-arising; the present turning is similar to the first turning."