[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [妙法蓮華經文句](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718) › 4.9 # 妙法蓮華經文句 4.9 妙法蓮華經文句 4.9 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [4.9](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718.4.9) 第三、惑有厚薄者，瑤師云：「三根得果已後遊觀無生。無生之理是一，及其出觀，緣三教則異，將必異之三教，惑於無生之一理，謂教既三，理豈容一？又將一理惑於三教，理既是一，教寧得三？踟蹰理教之間迴遑得失，以理惑教，此有得義；以教惑理，此有失義。上根以理惑教情多，初聞法說順情即悟；下根以教惑理情多，聞法說無三，逆其計謂故三聞乃解；中根處二楹之際，法說不悟，譬說便了。」今謂此釋三根未必應爾，三人踟蹰何等理教？若迴遑小乘理教則疑惑未盡，尚非初果斷結之人；若迴遑大乘理教，大乘條然永異，何曾與小乘相濫而言踟蹰耶？若以小惑大、以大惑小，爾前未斥方便，那忽遊觀出入預有踟蹰？既預踟蹰即已疑生執動，非始今日，若先動執生疑，聞開三顯一即應領解，那忽猶有驚疑？進退無據，故不用此解。今明根有利鈍者，皆論大乘根性，惑有厚薄者，約別惑為言耳，即為四句：一、惑輕根利；二、惑重根利；三、惑輕根鈍；四、惑重根鈍。若別惑輕、大根利，初聞即悟；若惑重根利，再聞方曉；若惑輕根鈍，三聞乃決；第四句雖復三聞不能得悟，止為結緣眾耳。或可初兩句根利同為上根，或可中間兩句為中下根（云云）。 > Third, concerning the heaviness or lightness of delusion: Master Yao said, 'After attaining the fruit, the three capacities travel and contemplate non-arising. The principle of non-arising is one, but when they emerge from contemplation and encounter the three teachings, these are different. Applying the inevitably different three teachings, they are deluded about the single principle of non-arising, thinking: since the teachings are three, how could the principle be one? Again, applying the single principle, they are deluded about the three teachings, thinking: since the principle is one, how could the teachings be three? Hesitating between principle and teaching, wavering between gain and loss: being deluded about teaching through principle has the sense of gain; being deluded about principle through teaching has the sense of loss. Those of superior capacity are mostly disposed to being deluded about teaching through principle; upon first hearing the preaching by Dharma, it accords with their disposition and they immediately awaken. Those of inferior capacity are mostly disposed to being deluded about principle through teaching; hearing the preaching by Dharma state that there are not three, it runs counter to their assumptions, so they understand only after hearing it three times. Those of middling capacity stand between the two extremes: not awakening through the preaching by Dharma, they are enlightened through the preaching by parables.' We now say that this explanation of the three capacities is not necessarily correct. Between what principle and teaching do the three types of people hesitate? If they waver between the principle and teaching of the Hīnayāna, their doubts have not been exhausted, and they would not even be persons who have severed the bonds at the first fruit. If they waver between the principle and teaching of the Mahāyāna, the Mahāyāna is distinctly and eternally different; how could it ever be confused with the Hīnayāna so that they hesitate? If they are deluded about the Mahāyāna through the lesser, or deluded about the lesser through the Mahāyāna: prior to this, the expedient had not yet been reproved; how could they have preexisting hesitation while entering and emerging from contemplation? Since they would already have hesitated, doubts would have arisen and attachments would have been unsettled—it would not just begin today. If attachments had been shaken and doubts had arisen beforehand, upon hearing the opening of the three and revealing of the one they should have immediately grasped and understood; why then would there still be astonishment and doubt? Wavering without foundation, this explanation is therefore not accepted. Now, in clarifying that capacities are sharp or dull, this is discussed entirely with respect to Mahāyāna dispositions; and heaviness or lightness of delusion is spoken of in terms of distinctive delusion. Thus there are four propositions: first, light delusion and sharp capacity; second, heavy delusion and sharp capacity; third, light delusion and dull capacity; fourth, heavy delusion and dull capacity. If distinctive delusion is light and the great capacity is sharp, one awakens immediately upon the first hearing. If delusion is heavy and capacity is sharp, one understands upon the second hearing. If delusion is light and capacity is dull, one is resolved upon the third hearing. As for the fourth proposition, though they hear it three times, they cannot attain awakening; they merely serve as the assembly establishing an affinity. Or, the first two propositions of sharp capacity may both be considered superior capacities, and the middle two propositions may be considered middling and inferior capacities, and so forth. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 4.8](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718.4.8) - [Next: 4.10](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718.4.10) - [Up: 4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718.4) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718~en-mt.4.9) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718.4.9](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718.4.9) · Pramāṇa