妙法蓮華經文句 3.83

3.83

就雙歎二智，先歎實，次歎權。實者諸佛智慧也，非三種化他權實故言諸佛，顯自行之實故言智慧，此智慧體即一心三智。「甚深無量」者，即稱歎之辭也。明佛實智豎徹如理之底故言甚深，橫窮法界之邊故言無量，無量甚深深高橫廣，譬如根深則條茂、源遠則流長，實智既然，權智例爾（云云）。「其智慧門」即是歎權智也，蓋是自行道前方便，有進趣之力故名為門，從門入到道中，道中稱實、道前謂權也。「難解難入」者，歎權之辭也。不謀而了，無方大用，七種方便不能測度，十住始解，十地為入，舉初與後，中間難示，難悟可知，而別舉聲聞、緣覺所不能知者，執重故別破之耳。法身本意元以自行權實擬之，無機逃走故言不知，《華嚴》頓照，聾啞瞽聵故言不知，《方等》彈斥保住草庵故言不知，《般若》轉教無心悕取一飱之意故言不知，今大機啟發放光動地，彼此今古諸佛道同，由懷疑惑故言不知。利根菩薩節節能知，鈍同二乘是亦不知也。「門」者，光宅取二乘方便為今經智慧門，此須與奪。若爾即是得門，云何如來破言不知？不知者則非門也。與者，此是最淺之能永不識所（云云）。今解自有方便智慧為門，得入佛智慧，如《瓔珞》云：「二觀為方便道，得入中道第一義諦。」亦是三教各各有四門，為方便得入中道。光宅之解於二觀中秖是一觀，於十二門秖是一門（云云）。又方便智慧為門，得入方便智，即是三教各各四門齊教入證也。自有佛智為門得入佛智慧，如上說圓因稱方便品，即是自行觀智為門，即是今經所歎其智慧門，圓教四門即其一也，自有實為門入方便智雙照二諦，即其義也。如此釋者豐富開闊，何如光宅區區一種耶？若依論以阿含為門，此須開拓諸教，準觀可知（云云）。

Regarding the paired praise of the two wisdoms, it first praises the real and next praises the expedient. The real is the wisdom of the Buddhas. Because it is not the three kinds of other-converting expedient and real, it says 'the Buddhas'; and to reveal the real of own-practice, it says 'wisdom'. The substance of this wisdom is just the three wisdoms in a single mind. 'Profound and immeasurable' is the expression of praise. Explaining that the Buddha's real wisdom vertically penetrates to the base of true principle, it says 'profound'; horizontally exhausting the limits of the dharma realm, it says 'immeasurable'. The immeasurable and profound is deep and high, horizontal and broad: just as when roots are deep the branches flourish, and when the source is far the stream is long. If this is so for real wisdom, expedient wisdom is by analogy the same (and so on). 'The gateway to their wisdom' praises expedient wisdom; it is the expedient means prior to the path of own-practice, called a 'gateway' because it possesses the power to advance toward [the goal]. Entering from the gateway, one arrives at the midst of the path; the midst of the path is called the real, and prior to the path is termed the expedient. 'Difficult to understand and difficult to enter' is the phrase praising the expedient. Operating without contrivance, its great functioning without fixed direction cannot be fathomed by the seven expedient means. The ten abodes are the beginning of understanding, and the ten stages are entering. Citing the beginning and the end, the middle is hard to show, and hard to awaken to, as can be known. And that it specially cites the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas as being unable to know is merely because their attachments are heavy, so it specifically refutes them. The original intent of the Dharmakāya was initially to propose the expedient and real of own-practice; because they lacked capacity and fled, it is said they did not know. In the Huayan, it illuminated immediately, but they were deaf and mute, blind and unhearing, hence it is said they did not know. In the Vaipulya, it rebuked them while they clung to their grass huts, hence it is said they did not know. In the Prajñā, they transmitted the teachings without a mind longing to take a single meal, hence it is said they did not know. Now, the great capacity is awakened, emitting light and shaking the earth; this and that, now and ancient, the path of all Buddhas is the same; yet because they harbored doubts, it is said they did not know. Bodhisattvas of sharp faculties can understand at every stage; those of dull faculties, like the two vehicles, likewise do not know. As for 'gateway', Guangzhai took the expedient means of the two vehicles to be the gateway of wisdom in this sūtra. This requires concession and rejection. If so, they would have attained the gateway, so why does the Tathāgata refute them by saying they do not know? Those who do not know do not have the gateway. Granting it: this is the shallowest capability, permanently not recognizing the object (and so on). Now the explanation is: there is naturally expedient wisdom serving as the gateway to enter the Buddha's wisdom, as the Yingluo says: 'The two contemplations serve as the path of expedients to enter the middle way, the paramārtha-satya.' It is also that the three teachings each have four gates serving as expedients to enter the middle way. Guangzhai's explanation is merely one contemplation among the two contemplations, and merely one gate among the twelve gates (and so on). Furthermore, expedient wisdom serves as the gateway to enter expedient wisdom: that is, the four gates of each of the three teachings enter realization along with the teachings. Naturally, Buddha-wisdom serves as the gateway to enter Buddha-wisdom; as stated above, the perfect cause is called the Expedient Means Chapter, which is the contemplation-wisdom of own-practice serving as the gateway, and this is the very gateway to their wisdom praised in this sūtra; the four gates of the perfect teaching are one such instance. Naturally, the real serves as the gateway to enter expedient wisdom, mutually illuminating the two truths; such is its meaning. An interpretation such as this is rich and expansive; how could it be compared to Guangzhai's narrow, solitary sort? If one relies on the treatise in taking the Āgamas as the gateway, this requires opening and expanding across the teachings, which can be known by reference to contemplation (and so on).