[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) › 6.21 # 妙法蓮華經文句 6.21 妙法蓮華經文句 6.21 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [6.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718.6.21) 有人言，信解三法，謂一往化、隨逐化、畢竟化，昔說大為一往，背大後為隨逐，父子相見為畢竟。又人天善為一往，說小乘齊法華為隨逐，說法華得記為畢竟。又初說二乘為一往，轉教為隨逐，法華為畢竟。又轉教為一往，歷方等為隨逐，悟一乘為畢竟。又說《法華》為一往，十地常教化為隨逐，至金剛心為畢竟。又結僧那為一往，中間為隨逐，得佛為畢竟。私謂諸解重疊，玉屑非寶，夫一往非本懷，畢竟是宗極，說人天、二乘為一往，可非本懷，昔為說大今說《法華》，箇是畢竟那稱一往？若《法華》畢竟而更成一往，人天一往還成畢竟，則大顛倒。又二乘是一往，草庵須破；昔大為一往，繫珠亦須破。若一破一不破，一是一往、一非一往。又父子相見是畢竟者，前畢竟應悟一，則後畢竟無復用；若後畢竟乃悟一，前畢竟非畢竟。節節有妨，今皆不用。有人言，此品是迹。何者？如來成道已久，乃至中間中止亦是迹耳。私謂義理乃然，在文不便。何者？佛未說本迹，那忽豫領？若未會三已應悟一（云云）。今釋品者，夫根有利鈍、惑有厚薄，說有法譬，悟有前後。法華座前猶如豌豆，文云「如來說法既久，我時在座身體疲懈，但念空無相願，於菩薩法都無一念好樂之心。」初聞略說動執生疑，廣聞五佛蒙籠未曉，今聞譬喻歡喜踊躍，信發解生疑去理明。歡喜是世界，信生是為人，疑去是對治，理明是第一義，以是因緣，故名「信解品」。稟小大教，初革凡成聖各有次位，但小乘信行從聞生解，苦忍明發信則稱行；法行歷法觀察，苦忍明發法則稱行。若信行人，轉入修道轉名信解；法行人入修道，轉名見得。準小望大亦應如此。中根之人聞說譬喻，初破疑惑入大乘見道故名為信，進入大乘修道故名為解。文云「無上寶聚不求自得，我等今日真是聲聞。」以佛道聲令一切聞，聞圓教入圓位，故名「信解品」。本迹者，四大弟子久入大乘成就佛法，迹引中根示初信解，故名「信解品」。此是領解段，近領火宅、遠領方便。文為二：一、經家敘歡喜，二、白佛自陳。先敘內心，次敘外敬。善吉獨稱「慧命」。三人摩訶者，通論皆大皆慧，別論善吉解空空慧為命，此約行也。諸慧人中佛慧第一，佛於《般若》命其轉教，其為慧人所命故云慧命。三弟子被命少，不以空為行宗，此約教也。摩訶如前說（云云）。得喜之由，遠聞方便五段法說，經家但敘聞希有法、聞授記二種，或可聞希有法敘四段，見受記是第五段也。如此聞見昔未曾有，歡喜之由也。「發希有心」者，敘近聞譬喻四番之說希有心發，心發故名之為信，以信故入，入歡喜位，即信解品意也。「從座起」者，敘外敬，如文。例身子，亦應三業領解，準前可解。「白佛」下，口自陳，文為二：初長行及七十三偈半，正陳得解；次十三偈，歎佛恩深。此解由佛，故先陳次歎。長行又二：初、略法說，二、譬廣說。略又二：法說、略舉譬。法說又二：先明昔稟三故不求，二明今會一故自得。不求中有標、有釋。標為三：一、居僧首故，二、俗年邁故，三、證得故。初居僧首者，我法臘既高，晚學以我為軌，忽改途易轍棄小求大，為後來所嫌，自固護彼，所以不求。二俗年已邁，若作菩薩當專任大道廣度眾生，今既朽老無所堪任，是故不求。三已得涅槃無為正位，不能發大心，高原陸地不生蓮華，盡、無生智已立，無所依求。所以者何？釋三不求，文不次第，先釋得涅槃不求，次釋年邁即兼僧首，或指昔說法既久心不喜樂。釋居僧首不求，既言在座復道年朽，知釋僧首也。釋不求如文。「我等今於佛前」下，陳得解之由，由遠聞五章略廣開三顯實，是故慶幸。「獲大善利」者，正陳得解，是近聞四番譬喻希有之法而獲開悟，開悟善利也。「無量珍寶」下，第二是略舉譬，譬昔不求而今自得希有法寶也。從「世尊我等樂說譬喻」下，是廣領解，有開譬、合譬，欲開先諮發（云云）。譬為五：一、從「捨父逃逝」下，名父子相失譬，近領火宅總譬，遠領方便略頌；二、從「窮子傭賃」下，名父子相見譬，近領火宅見火，遠領方便我以佛眼觀見；三、從「即遣傍人急追將還」下，名追誘譬，近領火宅捨几用車，遠領方便寢大施小；四、從「過是已後心相體信」下，委知家業譬，此非領上近遠，乃追取方等彈呵、《大品》轉教意耳；五、從「復經少時父知子意」下，名付家業譬，近領火宅賜一大車，遠領法說正直捨方便。又合第四、第五共為一領付譬，在下更明其意也。舊以西方無量壽佛以合長者，今不用之。西方佛別、緣異，佛別故隱顯義不成，緣異故子父義不成；又此經首末全無此旨，閉眼穿鑿。今依文附義，若釋窮子，取二乘人半字法銷文，若釋長者，取盧舍那佛滿字法門銷文。何者？宅內長者，脫纓珞著垢衣，衣纓有異，人秖是一，譬盧舍那佛隱無量神德示丈六金輝，執持糞器設三乘教，隱顯有殊何關體別，舍那著脫近尚不知，彌陀在遠何甞變換（云云）？父子相失譬又為四：一、子背父去，二、父求子中止，三、子遇到本，四、其父憂念。四段各兩。初兩者：一、背父而去，領總譬中五百人。昔結大乘子父，尋復失解流浪五道，故言「或十二十至五十歲」，通是佛子，子義微弱故言「幼稚」，非結緣己界，故言「久住他國」；二者向本而還，領總譬三十子。此緣有微著之義故言「長大」，緣既經苦關佛大悲，故言「遇到本國」。父求子而止為兩者：一、父求子不得，領總譬中長者。從眾生退大之後，伺其大機未得其會，故言「不得」；二、中止一城，「其家」者，領總譬中宅，「大富」者，領總譬中長者德業內外財富意耳。子到父城為二：一、到城之由，領火起苦惱之相。從退大已後，處處遊歷備嬰辛苦；二遂到父城者，以苦為機扣於大悲，故言遂到父城。其父憂喜即是兩者：一、念失子苦，二、念得子樂，領總譬中一門。子既幼稚取門不當動父之憂，元以此門通之，故動父之喜。分章竟。 > Some say that faith and understanding comprise three dharmas, namely initial conversion, following-up conversion, and ultimate conversion: in the past, preaching the Mahāyāna was initial, \[the disciples\] turning their backs on the Mahāyāna thereafter was following-up, and father and son meeting each other was ultimate. Others say that the wholesome \[dharmas\] of humans and gods were initial, expounding the Hīnayāna up to the Lotus Sūtra was following-up, and expounding the Lotus Sūtra and receiving predictions was ultimate. Others say that initially expounding the two vehicles was initial, rotating the teaching was following-up, and the Lotus Sūtra was ultimate. Others say that rotating the teaching was initial, passing through the vaipulya was following-up, and awakening to the One Vehicle was ultimate. Others say that expounding the Lotus Sūtra was initial, constantly teaching and converting through the ten stages was following-up, and reaching the vajra mind was ultimate. Others say that concluding the saṃnāha was initial, the intermediate period was following-up, and attaining buddhahood was ultimate. I privately consider that these various interpretations are redundant, like jade dust which is not a gem. Indeed, the initial is not the original intent, while the ultimate is the essential culmination. To say that \[the teachings of\] humans and gods or the two vehicles are initial is acceptable as not being the original intent; but in the past expounding the Mahāyāna and now expounding the Lotus Sūtra—these are ultimate, so how could they be called initial? If the Lotus Sūtra is ultimate and yet again becomes initial, while humans and gods are initial and yet return to being ultimate, this would be a great inversion. Furthermore, if the two vehicles are initial, the thatched hut must be demolished; if the past Mahāyāna was initial, the jewel tied \[in the garment\] must also be demolished. If one is demolished and the other is not, one would be initial and the other not initial. Furthermore, if father and son meeting each other is ultimate, the former ultimate should have awakened to the One, rendering the latter ultimate useless; if only the latter ultimate awakens to the One, then the former ultimate is not ultimate. There are obstacles at every turn; none of these are adopted now. Some say that this chapter belongs to the traces. Why? Because the Tathāgata has attained the Way long ago, and even his staying in the intermediate stage is merely trace. I privately consider that while the principle is indeed so, in the text it is awkward. Why? The Buddha has not yet expounded the origin and the traces, so how could they presciently receive and comprehend it? If they had not yet converged the three, how could they have already awakened to the One? (etc.) Now, in explaining the chapter: faculties are sharp or dull, delusions are thick or thin, expositions take the forms of dharma and parable, and awakenings occur earlier or later. Before the assembly of the Lotus Sūtra, \[their understanding\] was like round peas. The text says: 'The Tathāgata has expounded the Dharma for a long time; sitting in the assembly, my body was fatigued and weary, thinking only of emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness, with not a single thought of delight in the bodhisattva dharmas.' When first hearing the abridged exposition, their attachments were stirred and doubt arose; hearing at length about the five buddhas, they remained obscure and uncomprehending; now hearing the parable, they dance with joy; faith arises, understanding is born, doubts are dispelled, and principle is clarified. Joy is the worldly \[siddhānta\]; faith arising is the individual adaptation \[siddhānta\]; doubts dispelled is the counteractive \[siddhānta\]; principle clarified is the paramārtha-satya. For these reasons, it is called the 'Chapter on Faith and Understanding'. When receiving the Hīnayāna or Mahāyāna teachings, the initial transformation from ordinary person to noble one each has its sequence of stages. In the Hīnayāna, one who practices through faith generates understanding from hearing: when patience regarding suffering arises clearly, faith is termed practice; one who practices through dharma contemplates by passing through dharmas: when patience regarding suffering arises clearly, dharma is termed practice. If a practitioner through faith shifts into the path of cultivation, their name shifts to 'faith and understanding'; when a practitioner through dharma enters the path of cultivation, their name shifts to 'attainment through vision'. Comparing Hīnayāna to Mahāyāna, it should also be like this. When people of intermediate faculties hear the exposition of the parable, first breaking through doubt and confusion and entering the Mahāyāna path of vision, it is called 'faith'; advancing and entering the Mahāyāna path of cultivation, it is called 'understanding'. The text says: 'The unsurpassed treasure hoard was obtained naturally without being sought; we today are truly śrāvakas.' Making everything heard with the voice of the Buddha Way, hearing the perfect teaching, they enter the perfect stages; hence it is called the 'Chapter on Faith and Understanding'. As for the origin and traces: the four great disciples had long entered the Mahāyāna and perfected the Buddha Dharma; in their traces, they lead those of intermediate faculties and demonstrate the initial faith and understanding; hence it is called the 'Chapter on Faith and Understanding'. This is the section on receptive understanding: closely, it receives \[the parable of\] the burning house; distantly, it receives \[the chapter on\] expedient means. The text has two parts: first, the compiler of the sūtra recounts their joy; second, they address the Buddha in self-expression. First, the inner mind is recounted; next, outer reverence is recounted. Subhūti alone is called 'Life of Wisdom' (Āyuṣmat). The other three are called 'Mahā-': speaking generally, all are great and all possess wisdom; speaking specifically, Subhūti understands emptiness, taking empty wisdom as his life—this is according to practice. Among all wise persons, the Buddha's wisdom is foremost; in the Prajñā\[pāramitā\], the Buddha commanded him to rotate the teaching, and because he was commissioned by the Wise One, he is called 'Life of Wisdom'. The other three disciples were rarely so commissioned and did not take emptiness as the central principle of their practice—this is according to teaching. 'Mahā-' is as explained before (etc.). As for the cause of gaining joy: distantly hearing the five sections of dharma exposition in \[the chapter on\] expedient means, the compiler of the sūtra only recounts two kinds: hearing the rare dharma and hearing the prediction; or perhaps hearing the rare dharma recounts four sections, and witnessing the prediction is the fifth section. Such hearing and seeing had never existed before in the past; this is the cause of joy. 'Giving rise to a rare mind' recounts that closely hearing the fourfold exposition of the parable, a rare mind arose; because the mind arose, it is called faith; through faith they enter, entering the stage of joy—this is the meaning of the Chapter on Faith and Understanding. 'Rising from their seats' recounts outer reverence, as in the text. By analogy with Śāriputra, they should also receive and understand with the three karmas, which can be understood according to what preceded. From 'addressing the Buddha' onward, they orally express it themselves. The text has two parts: first, the prose and seventy-three and a half gāthās directly express their gaining understanding; next, thirteen gāthās praise the profound grace of the Buddha. This understanding stems from the Buddha, so they first express it and then praise him. The prose also has two parts: first, an abridged dharma exposition; second, an expanded exposition by parable. The abridged has two parts: dharma exposition, and an abridged presentation of the parable. The dharma exposition also has two parts: first, clarifying that in the past, because they received the three, they did not seek; second, clarifying that now, because they converge with the One, it was naturally obtained. In 'not seeking', there are the thesis and the explanation. The thesis has three points: first, because they were heads of the saṃgha; second, because their mortal years were advanced; third, because of what they had realized and attained. First, being heads of the saṃgha: 'Our seniority in the Dharma being high, late learners take us as models; if we were suddenly to change course and alter our tracks, discarding the Hīnayāna to seek the Mahāyāna, we would be resented by later generations; to firmly preserve them, we did not seek.' Second, their mortal years being already advanced: 'If one acts as a bodhisattva, one must take full charge of the Great Way and broadly deliver sentient beings; now being old and decrepit, we are incapable of undertaking it; therefore we did not seek.' Third, having already attained the unconditioned, upright stage of nirvāṇa, they could not generate the great mind; lotuses do not grow on high plateaus and dry land; the knowledge of destruction and non-arising was already established, with nothing further to rely on or seek. Why is this? In explaining the three kinds of not seeking, the text is not in sequence: first, it explains that attaining nirvāṇa was why they did not seek; next, it explains that advanced age entails being heads of the saṃgha; or it refers to past preaching of the Dharma having lasted long and their minds lacking delight. In explaining that being heads of the saṃgha was why they did not seek, since it says 'sitting in the assembly' and also mentions 'decrepit with age', we know this explains \[being heads of\] the saṃgha. The explanation of not seeking is as in the text. From 'We now, before the Buddha' onward, they express the cause of gaining understanding, which was due to distantly hearing the five sections of abridged and expanded opening of the three and revealing of the real; hence they rejoice. 'Obtained great wholesome benefit' directly expresses gaining understanding: closely hearing the rare dharma of the fourfold parables, they attained awakening, which is the wholesome benefit of awakening. From 'immeasurable precious treasures' onward, the second is an abridged presentation of the parable, analogizing that what was not sought in the past was now naturally obtained as the rare jewel of Dharma. From 'World-Honoured One, we delight in speaking a parable' onward, it is the expanded receptive understanding, containing the setting forth of the parable and the matching of the parable; wishing to set it forth, they first consult and raise it (etc.). The parable has five parts: 1. From 'abandoning his father and fleeing' onward, named the parable of father and son losing each other, which closely receives the overall parable of the burning house, and distantly receives the abridged gāthās of expedient means; 2. From 'the poor son hired out for labor' onward, named the parable of father and son seeing each other, which closely receives seeing the fire in the burning house, and distantly receives 'with my Buddha eye I observed and saw' of expedient means; 3. From 'instantly dispatching attendants to rush after and bring him back' onward, named the parable of pursuing and inducing, which closely receives discarding the table and using carts in the burning house, and distantly receives concealing the great and bestowing the small in expedient means; 4. From 'after this, their minds mutually trusted' onward, named the parable of fully knowing the household affairs, which does not receive the proximate and distant above, but rather retrospectively takes the intent of the Vaipulya's reprimands and the Prajñā's rotating the teaching; 5. From 'after another brief period, the father knew his son's mind' onward, named the parable of entrusting the household affairs, which closely receives granting the one great cart in the burning house, and distantly receives 'honestly discarding expedient means' in the dharma exposition. Furthermore, the fourth and fifth are combined into a single parable of receptive entrustment, whose meaning will be clarified further below. Formerly, people matched the elder with the Buddha of Immeasurable Life in the West; this is not adopted now. The Buddha of the West is distinct, and the conditions are different: because the Buddha is distinct, the meaning of concealing and manifesting does not stand; because the conditions are different, the meaning of son and father does not stand. Moreover, from beginning to end, this sūtra has no such import whatsoever; that is closing one's eyes and forcing interpretations. Now, relying on the text and adhering to the meaning: if explaining the poor son, take the half-word teaching of the two vehicles to parse the text; if explaining the elder, take the full-word teaching of Rocana Buddha to parse the text. Why? The elder inside the mansion takes off his necklaces and puts on soiled garments; the garments and necklaces differ, but the person is just one. This analogizes Rocana Buddha concealing his immeasurable divine virtues, displaying the sixteen-foot golden radiance, holding a dung basket, and establishing the teachings of the three vehicles. Concealing and manifesting differ, but what does that have to do with being distinct entities? When Rocana puts on and takes off \[garments\], they still do not recognize him nearby; how could Amitābha far away ever undergo such alterations (etc.)? The parable of father and son losing each other also has four parts: 1. The son turns his back on the father and departs; 2. The father seeks the son and stops \[in a city\]; 3. The son encounters his native \[place\]; 4. The father grieves and longs. Each of the four sections has two points. In the first two: 1. Turning his back on the father and departing receives the five hundred persons in the overall parable. In the past, they established the bond of father and son in the Mahāyāna, but soon lost understanding and wandered in the five paths; hence it says 'perhaps ten, twenty, up to fifty years'. Universally they are the Buddha's sons, but the meaning of son was weak, hence it says 'infantile'; this was not the realm of establishing the bond themselves, hence it says 'long dwelling in another country'. 2. Returning toward the origin receives the thirty sons in the overall parable. This condition has the sense of becoming apparent from being subtle, hence it says 'grown up'; having experienced suffering, the condition touches the Buddha's great compassion, hence it says 'encountered his native country'. The father seeking the son and stopping has two points: 1. The father seeks the son without finding him receives the elder in the overall parable. From the time sentient beings retreated from the Mahāyāna onward, he waited for their Mahāyāna capacity without finding the convergence; hence it says 'did not find'. 2. Stopping in a city; 'his household' receives the mansion in the overall parable; 'vastly wealthy' receives the inner and outer wealth of the elder's virtuous karma in the overall parable. The son arriving at the father's city has two points: 1. The reason for arriving at the city receives the aspect of the suffering affliction of the fire breaking out: from retreating from the Mahāyāna onward, traveling everywhere and undergoing all kinds of hardship. 2. Finally arriving at the father's city: taking suffering as the capacity to knock on great compassion, hence it says 'finally arrived at the father's city'. The father's grief and joy also have two points: 1. Thinking of the suffering of losing the son; 2. Thinking of the joy of finding the son. This receives the single door in the overall parable: the son being infantile, taking an inappropriate door stirs the father's grief; originally using this door to pass through stirs the father's joy. The division of sections is finished. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 6.20](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718.6.20) - [Next: 6.22](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718.6.22) - [Up: 6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718.6) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718~en-mt.6.21) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718.6.21](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1718.6.21) · Pramāṇa