妙法蓮華經文句 3.2

3.2

從「爾時彌勒欲自決疑」下訖偈，即是發問序，文為二：長行、偈頌。長行中經家述自疑、他疑發問。問中此土、他土如文，何意有偈頌耶？龍樹《毘婆沙》云：「一、隨國土天竺有散花、貫花之說，如此間序、後銘也；二、隨樂欲不同，有樂散說，或樂章句；三、隨生解不同，或於散說得解，或於章句得解；四、隨利鈍，利者一聞即悟，鈍者再說方悟。」又表佛殷勤重說，又為眾集前後故有偈也。偈有六十二行，文為兩：初五十四行頌上問，後八行請答。就問為兩：前四行，問此土；後五十行，問他土。長行總問此土六瑞，偈中長有香風地淨，無說法入定。觀文謂言盈縮，尋義不然。說法是慧性，入定是天心，由天心慧性，能作動地放光，舉末即能知本故，縮非縮也。他不見此意，謂彌勒不問兩事，便不以為瑞。今反難之，若彌勒不問，文殊何故而答？又，問指何處為問？今指長行，總問是也，若更顯其別問，秖導師兩字是也。良以說法、入定能導於人，既稱導師，即是問說法、入定也，是故非縮。他云：「風由檀林故香，地加之嚴淨，盈長兩事。」今謂非盈，風本無香而香，為奇特故以成瑞，夫天花至妙，豈有色而無香？此表因運至果，如花有香風，花既集地，地則嚴淨，因若趣果，果則嚴淨。《金光明》云：「聚集功德莊嚴佛身。」故以二事顯成四花，盈非盈也。

From 'At that time Maitreya, wishing to resolve his own doubt' down to the verses is the preface of raising questions. The text consists of two parts: the prose and the gāthās. In the prose, the compiler of the sūtra narrates his own doubt and others' doubt to raise the question. Within the question, this land and other lands are as in the text. Why are there gāthās? Nāgārjuna's Vibhāṣā states: 'First, in accordance with the country: in India there are expounding in loose flowers and expounding in strung flowers, like the prefaces and concluding inscriptions in this land. Second, in accordance with differing desires: some delight in unmetered speech, while others delight in metered verses. Third, in accordance with differing arising of understanding: some attain understanding from unmetered speech, while others attain understanding from metered verses. Fourth, in accordance with sharp or dull faculties: sharp ones awaken upon a single hearing, while dull ones awaken only after a second explanation.' Furthermore, it shows the Buddha's earnest restatement, and gāthās are also present because of the earlier and later gatherings of the assembly. There are sixty-two lines of verse, and the text consists of two parts: the first fifty-four lines versify the preceding question; the latter eight lines request an answer. Regarding the question, it consists of two parts: the first four lines ask about this land; the latter fifty lines ask about other lands. The prose generally asks about the six portents of this land; the verse additionally has the fragrant wind and the purification of the ground, but lacks the expounding of Dharma and entering into samādhi. Looking at the text, one might say there is an excess or omission, but examining the meaning, this is not so. Expounding the Dharma is the nature of wisdom; entering into samādhi is the celestial mind. Because of the celestial mind and the nature of wisdom, one can shake the earth and emit light; by presenting the branch, one can thereby know the root. Therefore, omission is not omission. Others do not see this meaning and claim that Maitreya did not ask about these two matters, and thus they do not consider them portents. Now I refute them: if Maitreya did not ask, why did Mañjuśrī answer? Furthermore, to what point does the question refer as the question? Now I point to the prose, where the general question is it; if one further reveals its specific question, it is simply the two words 'the Guide'. Truly, because expounding the Dharma and entering into samādhi can guide people, since he is addressed as the Guide, this is indeed asking about expounding the Dharma and entering into samādhi; therefore it is not an omission. Others say: 'The wind was fragrant because of the sandalwood forest, and the ground was additionally purified and adorned—these are two excessive additions.' Now I say they are not an excess: the wind was originally without fragrance yet became fragrant, which constituted a portent because of its extraordinary nature. Indeed, celestial flowers are supremely wondrous; how could they have color without fragrance? This symbolizes that the cause advances to the effect, just as the flowers have fragrant wind; once the flowers gather on the ground, the ground is purified and adorned. If the cause tends toward the effect, the effect is purified and adorned. The Suvarṇaprabhāsa-sūtra states: 'Accumulating merit and virtue adorns the Buddha's body.' Therefore, these two matters are used to complete the manifestation of the four flowers; hence an excess is not an excess.