妙法蓮華經文句 4.135

4.135

從「今我亦如是」下，第二，有四十三行半，頌釋迦章，上文無歎法希有，頌中具六。但舊解釋迦章點出譬本，指上本下文義交加，尋疏則目眩，聽說則心亂，鈍者致惑。私記者先撰置前，至文更帖，庶以自鏡耳。然釋迦章偈凡兩意：一頌上，二本下。上根已悟、中根未了，故須作諭還譬上法，譬不孤起承躡有由，故言譬本也。口舊為五譬，一、長者譬，二、思濟譬，三、權誘譬，四、平等譬，五、不虛譬。然初是總譬非獨長者，思濟是救子不得義耳，猶少見火譬故不用。瑤師云：「〈方便品〉中從『諸佛隨宜所說』，竟長行，正顯一乘真實。凡有四章：一者、開昔四三，成今四一；二、以五濁故，不得說一乘；三、從『若我弟子自謂』下，明不得者；四、從『汝當一心信解』下，明不虛妄。始末言異，以意求之皆實也。下火宅中，但譬〈方便品〉內三章：從『譬如』下，竟『願時賜與』，是第一譬五濁章；從『各賜諸子等一大車』，竟『得未曾有』，是第二譬真實章；從『是長者等賜諸子』，竟『寧有虛妄不』，是第三譬不虛妄章。」玄暢師云六譬：「一、宅中眾災之相；二、覺者唯佛起一乘念；三、眾生不受，為說怖畏之事；四；說三乘樂；五；還說一乘教；六結不虛妄也。」龍師云六譬：「一、舍宅父子，譬佛王三界化眾生也；二、長者見火，譬我以佛眼觀見六道眾生也；三、長者救火，譬佛三七欲度眾生不得用大也；四、長者方便誘以三車，譬佛設三乘教也；五、長者賜一大車，譬說妙法華；六、不虛妄譬也。」火宅十譬：一、「今我亦如是」二行，總頌上權實，為下總譬作本；二、「舍利弗當知」四行，頌上五濁，為下見火譬本；三、「我始坐道場」六行半，明大乘化不得，為下救子不得譬本；四、「尋念過去佛」十一行，明三乘化得，為下救子得譬本；五「我見佛子等」一行，明大機發，為下見子免難譬本；六、「咸以恭敬心」一行，明三乘索果，為下諸子索車譬本；七、「我即作是念」二行一句，明如來歡喜，為下長者歡喜譬本；八、「於諸菩薩前」三句，明為說大乘，為下等賜大車譬本；九、「菩薩聞是法」一行，明眾生歡喜，為下諸子得車歡喜譬本；十、「汝等勿有疑」一行半，明佛無虛妄，為下長者不虛譬本也。有人評之，若以句判應有十九句，若以義判則有六義：一、總，二、見火，三、一乘化不得，四、三乘化得，五、還說一乘，六、不虛，自餘攝入六義之內。又十譬則法譬參差，法說中索車在前、父喜在後；譬說中父喜在前、索車在後，雖欲會通，終成迂迴。又大小相違，法說見大機動故喜，譬說見小緣免難故喜；法說明大因，譬說敘小果；法說大障將傾，譬說小難已離，義勢乖各。又有無異故，法說中敘上根易悟，故無索車；譬說明中根猶惑，故有索車。若引恭敬為索車者，殊不體文意，今無此四失。然有無者，長行有五：一、開三，二、顯一，三、五濁，四、真偽，五、不虛。偈亦五，但長行有真偽，偈則無；偈有歎法，長行則無，互現耳。次第者，長行先開三、後顯一；偈先顯一、後開三。開合者，開三顯一，為總譬本，二偈合而不開；次離五濁文，為四譬之本，開而不合。不虛為不虛譬本，不合不開。明取捨，四段經文為六譬之本，取而不捨；歎法一章非六譬，故捨而不取。論總別，初開三顯一，總敘釋迦一化教門；從五濁去，皆屬別譬也。次本迹者，總敘佛教總含本迹，從五濁去別明本迹。五濁一章正明居法身本，見眾生苦起大悲；從一乘化不得者，垂迹（云云）。今謂迹門大意，正是開三顯一，前直法說上根即悟解，中、下未悟更為作譬，譬於三一令得曉了。前法說中既略廣開三顯一，後譬說中亦應略廣許三賜一，因緣中亦應引三入一，若作三譬、六譬、十譬，於三周之文不合，於四人信解乖離，是所不用。

From “Now I too am like this” onwards, second, there are forty-three and a half lines versifying the section on Śākyamuni. In the preceding prose, there was no praise of the Dharma's rarity, but here in the verses, all six [meanings] are complete. However, former commentators, in explaining the section on Śākyamuni, marked out the basis of the parables, intertwining the points of the upper text [as source] and lower text [as parable] so that inspecting the commentaries dazzled the eyes, and listening to lectures confused the mind, causing duller persons to fall into bewilderment. In my private notes, I first compile and place this beforehand, and when coming to the text, I shall affix it again, hoping that it may serve as a mirror for oneself. Now the gāthās in the Śākyamuni section have in all two meanings: first, versifying what preceded; second, serving as the basis for what follows. Those of superior capacity have already awakened, while those of middling capacity have not yet comprehended; therefore it is necessary to make parables that reflect back upon the preceding Dharma. Parables do not arise in isolation, but follow along and have their source; hence they are called the “basis of the parables.” Orally, former masters posited five parables: 1. the elder parable, 2. the deliberation on rescuing parable, 3. the expedient enticement parable, 4. the equality parable, 5. the non-falsehood parable. However, the first is a general parable and not solely about the elder; “deliberation on rescuing” only means the impossibility of rescuing the children, yet it still lacks the parable of seeing the fire, so I do not use it. Master Yao said: “In the ‘Expedient Means Chapter’, from ‘What the Buddhas preach according to suitability’ through the end of the prose, the reality of the One Vehicle is properly revealed. There are four sections in all: first, opening the four threes of the past to accomplish the four ones of the present; second, being unable to preach the One Vehicle due to the five turbidities; third, from ‘If my disciples call themselves…’ onwards, clarifying those who fail to attain it; fourth, from ‘You should single-mindedly believe and understand…’ onwards, clarifying non-falsehood. The words differ from beginning to end, but when sought by their intention, they are all real. Below, in the burning house, only three sections of the ‘Expedient Means Chapter’ are illustrated: from ‘Suppose there is…’ down to ‘wishing that he would grant them at once’, this is the first, illustrating the section on the five turbidities; from ‘He bestowed equally on each of the sons a great carriage’ down to ‘gaining what had never been before’, this is the second, illustrating the section on reality; from ‘When this elder equally bestowed upon all his sons’ down to ‘could there be any falsehood?’, this is the third, illustrating the section on non-falsehood.” Master Xuanchang posited six parables: “1. the signs of many calamities within the house; 2. the Awakened One alone conceiving the thought of the One Vehicle; 3. the sentient beings not accepting it, so preaching fearful matters to them; 4. preaching the joys of the Three Vehicles; 5. turning back to preach the One Vehicle teaching; 6. concluding with non-falsehood.” Master Long posited six parables: “1. the house and the father and sons, illustrating the Buddha ruling the triple world and converting sentient beings; 2. the elder seeing the fire, illustrating ‘I, with the Buddha eye, see the sentient beings of the six destinies’; 3. the elder rescuing from the fire, illustrating that for three weeks the Buddha wished to liberate sentient beings but could not use the Great; 4. the elder expediently enticing them with the three carriages, illustrating the Buddha establishing the Three Vehicle teaching; 5. the elder bestowing the one great carriage, illustrating the preaching of the Wonderful Lotus; 6. the non-falsehood parable.” The burning house ten parables: 1. “Now I too am like this,” two lines, generally versifying the preceding expedient and real, serving as the basis for the general parable below; 2. “Śāriputra, you should know,” four lines, versifying the five turbidities above, serving as the basis for the parable of seeing the fire below; 3. “When I first sat at the place of the Way,” six and a half lines, clarifying the inability to convert via the Mahāyāna, serving as the basis for the parable of being unable to rescue the children below; 4. “Then I reflected on past Buddhas,” eleven lines, clarifying the ability to convert via the Three Vehicles, serving as the basis for the parable of being able to rescue the children below; 5. “I saw the Buddha’s sons and others,” one line, clarifying the stirring of the great capacity, serving as the basis for the parable of seeing the children escape the danger below; 6. “All with reverent minds,” one line, clarifying the Three Vehicles seeking the fruit, serving as the basis for the parable of the children asking for carriages below; 7. “I immediately thought this,” two lines and one phrase, clarifying the Tathāgata’s joy, serving as the basis for the parable of the elder’s joy below; 8. “In the presence of the bodhisattvas,” three phrases, clarifying the preaching of the Mahāyāna, serving as the basis for the parable of equally bestowing the great carriage below; 9. “When the bodhisattvas hear this Dharma,” one line, clarifying the sentient beings’ joy, serving as the basis for the parable of the children’s joy upon obtaining the carriages below; 10. “You all should have no doubt,” one and a half lines, clarifying the Buddha’s freedom from falsehood, serving as the basis for the parable of the elder’s non-falsehood below. Someone criticized this: if judged by phrases, there should be nineteen phrases; if judged by meaning, there are six meanings: 1. general, 2. seeing the fire, 3. inability to convert via the One Vehicle, 4. ability to convert via the Three Vehicles, 5. turning back to preach the One Vehicle, 6. non-falsehood; the rest are subsumed under these six meanings. Furthermore, with ten parables, the Dharma and the parables are inconsistent: in the Dharma exposition, asking for carriages comes first and the father’s joy comes later; in the parable exposition, the father’s joy comes first and asking for carriages comes later. Although one may try to reconcile them, it ultimately becomes circuitous. Moreover, the great and the small contradict each other: in the Dharma exposition, he rejoices because the great capacity is stirred; in the parable exposition, he rejoices because the small conditions have escaped danger; the Dharma exposition clarifies the great cause, whereas the parable exposition recounts the small fruit; the Dharma exposition speaks of great obstacles about to crumble, whereas the parable exposition speaks of small calamities already left behind—their doctrinal thrusts diverge. Furthermore, there is a difference of presence and absence: in the Dharma exposition, recounting the superior capacity’s easy awakening, there is no asking for carriages; the parable exposition clarifies that the middling capacity is still deluded, hence there is asking for carriages. If one cites reverence as asking for carriages, that completely misses the text’s intention. Now [our interpretation] is free of these four errors. Regarding presence and absence, the prose has five: 1. opening the three, 2. revealing the one, 3. the five turbidities, 4. the genuine and the counterfeit, 5. non-falsehood. The gāthās also have five, but while the prose has the genuine and counterfeit, the gāthās do not; the gāthās have praising the Dharma, while the prose does not—they mutually manifest each other. Regarding sequence, the prose first opens the three and then reveals the one; the gāthās first reveal the one and then open the three. Regarding opening and combining: opening the three and revealing the one serve as the basis for the general parable, the two gāthās being combined and not opened; next, the text on parting from the five turbidities serves as the basis for the four parables, being opened and not combined; non-falsehood serves as the basis for the parable of non-falsehood, neither combined nor opened. Clarifying selection and omission: four sections of the sūtra text serve as the basis for the six parables, selected and not omitted; the section on praising the Dharma does not belong to the six parables, hence omitted and not selected. Regarding the general and the specific: first, opening the three and revealing the one generally recounts Śākyamuni’s whole teaching career; from the five turbidities onward, they all belong to specific parables. Next, origin and traces: the general account of the Buddha’s teaching generally encompasses origin and traces; from the five turbidities onward, origin and traces are specifically clarified. The section on the five turbidities properly clarifies abiding in the origin of the Dharmakāya, seeing the suffering of sentient beings, and giving rise to great compassion; from the inability to convert via the One Vehicle onward, it concerns descending in traces (and so forth). Now I say that the overarching intent of the trace gate is precisely opening the three and revealing the one. Previously, in the direct Dharma exposition, those of superior capacity immediately awakened and understood; those of middling and lower capacity had not yet awakened, so he further devised parables for them, using parables of the three and the one to enable them to understand clearly. Since the preceding Dharma exposition briefly and extensively opened the three and revealed the one, the subsequent parable exposition should also briefly and extensively promise the three and bestow the one, and in [the chapter on] causes and conditions he should also guide the three to enter the one. If one posits three parables, six parables, or ten parables, it does not conform to the text of the three cycles and departs from the faith and understanding of the four persons; therefore, they are not used.