法華玄義釋籤 2.59

2.59

次釋中一一文，皆先舉譬，次釋譬。經中譬文廣、合文略，但云法華亦爾最大最上最明等耳。今出譬則略、合文稍廣，準經望之可以意得。海言德者，德者得也，得眾水故。萬善合萬流，佛乘合一鹹，不合江河川流流通三處，應云三教各有所歸而不及法華也。次山譬者，經中具列土山黑山小大鐵圍及十寶山，以比須彌。今文略無，但云四寶者，從所比說，餘山並無四寶故也。天居四寶頂如醍醐在四味上，反以四寶譬四誹謗，天居其上如教離謗也。四謗如前《金剛藏》意。又更却以四寶譬位，一根緣等以譬諸天，諸天不離四寶山故。若盡消經者，應以土等四山如四味，須彌在十山之內而最高，如佛界在十界之內而最勝。次月譬者，實如盈、權如虧，同體權實如月輪無缺，會漸入頓如月明相漸圓。故知前標教相中云「是漸頓」者，與月譬意同。經中以星比月天子，雖舉天子，經合既云此法華經最為照明，故今但取圓亦兼以明為譬。次日譬中復加燈炬星，今合日譬中但云破化城故，但取日明能映諸明故耳。若更合者，亦可以燈等四，譬二乘及通別菩薩，並與無明共住故也。故次重引中略舉星月而除方便，故知方便所收復廣。次梵王譬中，經云「如梵王為一切眾生之父」，今亦能生一切諸教故也。今文但云自在者，以對簡二王非自在故耳。輪王地居如俗，釋王居天如真，梵於三界如中，若真俗自在、中未必自在，若中自在、真俗必自在，故以今經譬於梵王。文中便簡歷別中道亦非自在，且約教道，故知梵王兼譬二中，今譬圓融故云「最」也。次法王譬中五佛子，經文自列四果支佛，此等所說不及佛故。次例又二：先例四可見，次「非但」下結。

Next, in the explanation, each passage first presents the simile and then explains it. In the sūtra, the text of the simile is extensive while the matching text is brief, merely stating that the Lotus Sūtra is likewise greatest, supreme, most luminous, and so on. Now, the presentation of the simile is brief while the matching text is somewhat extensive; reading them against the sūtra, the meaning can be grasped. Speaking of the ocean's 'virtue' (de): 'virtue' means 'attainment' (de), because it attains [all] waters. The ten thousand virtues match the ten thousand streams; the Buddha vehicle matches the single salty [taste]. Not matching the rivers and streams flowing into the three places implies that the three teachings each have that to which they return, yet fall short of the Lotus Sūtra. Next, regarding the mountain simile: the sūtra completely lists earthen mountains, black mountains, small and large iron-encircling mountains, and the ten jewel mountains to compare with Sumeru. The present text is condensed and omits them, speaking only of the four jewels; this is stated in terms of what is being compared, for the other mountains all lack the four jewels. The devas dwelling on the peak of the four jewels is like ghee being atop the four flavors; conversely, using the four jewels to illustrate the four slanders, the devas dwelling atop them is like the teaching being free from slanders. The four slanders are as in the intention of the *Vajragarbha* previously. Furthermore, conversely taking the four jewels to illustrate the ranks, the single faculty, conditions, and so on illustrate the devas, because the devas do not depart from the four jewel mountains. If fully interpreting the sūtra: one should take the four mountains such as the earthen ones as the four flavors, and Sumeru being within the ten mountains yet highest is like the Buddha realm being within the ten realms yet most superior. Next, regarding the moon simile: the real is like fullness, the provisional is like waning; provisional and real of the same substance are like the moon's disc being without flaw; converging the gradual into the sudden is like the moon's luminous appearance gradually becoming full. Therefore we know that the previous statement under the heading of doctrinal characteristics, 'it is gradual and sudden', shares the same meaning with the moon simile. In the sūtra, stars are compared to the moon deva; although it brings up the moon deva, since the sūtra's matching says that this Lotus Sūtra is the most illuminating, the present [text] merely takes its round fullness and also combines it with illumination as the simile. Next, in the sun simile, lamps, torches, and stars are additionally added; now in matching the sun simile, it only speaks of shattering the conjured city, merely taking the sun's brightness as being able to outshine all other lights. If one were to match further: one could also take the four [lights] such as the lamp to illustrate the two vehicles and the bodhisattvas of the Shared and Separate [Teachings], as they all dwell together with ignorance. Therefore, in the subsequent citation, it briefly mentions the stars and moon while removing the provisional [means]; thus we know that what is included by provisional means is again broad. Next, in the Brahma King simile, the sūtra states, 'Just as the Brahma King is the father of all sentient beings,' so too is this [sūtra] able to give birth to all teachings. The present text merely speaks of 'sovereignty' (zizai) only to contrastively differentiate the two kings as not being sovereign. The wheel-turning king dwelling on the earth is like the conventional; the Śakra king dwelling in heaven is like the real; Brahma in relation to the three realms is like the middle. If sovereign in the conventional and real, one is not necessarily sovereign in the middle; if sovereign in the middle, one must be sovereign in the conventional and real; hence the present sūtra is compared to the Brahma King. In the text it conveniently differentiates that the middle path of serial gradation is also not sovereign, which is temporarily spoken in terms of the teaching path; thus we know that the Brahma King additionally illustrates the two middles, and here illustrates perfect fusion, hence it says 'supreme'. Next, regarding the Dharma King simile, the 'five Buddha-sons' are directly listed in the sūtra text as the four fruits and pratyekabuddhas; what these [beings] preach does not equal the Buddha. Next, the paradigm again has two parts: first, the paradigm of the four is evident; next, the conclusion follows from 'Not only...'