妙法蓮華經文句 8.33

8.33

「譬如有人」下，第二，開譬。為二釋：一、約觀門，二、約教門。觀門者，眾生之心具諸煩惱名「高原」，修習觀智名「穿掘」，方證理味如得清水。依通觀，乾慧地如「乾土」，性地為「濕土泥」，見諦為得清水。別觀從假入空，但見空不見不空，斷四住如鑿乾土，去水尚遠；從空出假，先知非假今知非空，因是二觀得入中道，能伏無明轉見濕土，去水則近也。圓觀中道非空非假而照空假，如漸至濕泥，四住已盡無明已伏，已得中道相似圓解故言如泥，若入初住發真中解，即破無明如泥澄清，得見中道如見清水。《法華論》云「佛性水」當知次第。次，約教門者，土譬經教，水喻中道，教詮中道如土含水。三藏教門未詮中道猶如乾土；方等、般若帶於方便說中道義，如見濕土；法華教正直顯露說無上道，如見泥。因法華教生聞思修，即悟中道真見佛性，所發真慧不復依文，如獲清水無復土相。故《華嚴》云「十住菩薩所有慧身，不由他悟也。」有人言，初教如高原乾土，《大品》如濕土，《法華》如泥佛果如水。有人言，《維摩》、《思益》如乾土，《無量義》如濕土，《法華》如泥，佛果如水。有人言，《大品》如乾土，《無量義》如濕土，《法華》如泥，佛果如水。三家皆五時之說。生師云「受持法華求佛道，欲得如渴；三乘於一乘難信，於法華求解如高原；受持讀誦為穿。未能如聞而解，為未聞如乾土，能解為至泥。」注家同。有人云，此一解去佛遠，一解去佛近，初三師明諸教去佛遠、法華去佛近，後二解但於法華中論遠近。尋經應二義：一、舉餘經對《法華》明遠近，二、就《法華》論遠近。諸師失經旨。

From "Suppose a person" onwards is the second [part], presenting the simile. It has two interpretations: first, in terms of the contemplation approach; second, in terms of the doctrinal approach. As for the contemplation approach, the minds of sentient beings contain all defilements, which is called the "high plateau"; cultivating contemplative wisdom is called "digging"; and only upon witnessing the savor of principle is it like obtaining clear water. According to the shared contemplation, the stage of dry wisdom is like "dry earth"; the stage of nature is "moist earth and mud"; and seeing the truths is obtaining clear water. In the distinctive contemplation, entering emptiness from conventional existence, one sees only emptiness and does not see non-emptiness; severing the four dwellings is like digging dry earth, still far from water. Emerging from emptiness into conventional existence, having previously known non-conventionality and now knowing non-emptiness, through these two contemplations one is able to enter the Middle Way, subdue ignorance, and gradually see moist earth, which is near to water. In the perfect contemplation, the Middle Way is neither empty nor conventional yet illumines emptiness and conventionality; this is like gradually reaching moist mud, where the four dwellings are already exhausted, ignorance is already subdued, and one has already attained the conforming perfect understanding of the Middle Way, hence it is said to be like mud. If one enters the first abidance and gives rise to genuine understanding of the Middle, one immediately destroys ignorance, like mud settling clear, and comes to see the Middle Way as seeing clear water. The Treatise on the Lotus Sūtra speaks of the "water of buddha-nature"; one should know the progression. Next, regarding the doctrinal approach, earth is a simile for the scriptures and teachings, and water illustrates the Middle Way; the teachings express the Middle Way just as earth contains water. The Tripiṭaka doctrinal approach does not yet express the Middle Way, like dry earth. The Vaipulya and Prajñā teachings carry expedients while speaking of the meaning of the Middle Way, like seeing moist earth. The Lotus teaching directly and openly speaks of the unsurpassed path, like seeing mud. Arising from hearing, reflecting, and cultivating through the Lotus teaching, one awakens to the Middle Way and truly sees the buddha-nature; the genuine wisdom aroused no longer relies on the text, like obtaining clear water with no remaining sign of earth. Therefore, the Avataṃsaka says, "The wisdom-body possessed by bodhisattvas of the ten abidances does not arise from another's awakening." Someone says: the initial teaching is like the dry earth on the high plateau, the Pañcaviṃśati is like moist earth, the Lotus is like mud, and the fruit of buddhahood is like water. Another says: the Vimalakīrti and Viśeṣacinti are like dry earth, the Innumerable Meanings is like moist earth, the Lotus is like mud, and the fruit of buddhahood is like water. Another says: the Pañcaviṃśati is like dry earth, the Innumerable Meanings is like moist earth, the Lotus is like mud, and the fruit of buddhahood is like water. These three teachers all rely on the theory of the five periods. Master Daosheng says: "Upholding the Lotus and seeking the Buddha path, desiring to attain it is like thirst; for the three vehicles, the One Vehicle is hard to believe, and seeking understanding in the Lotus is like the high plateau; upholding, reading, and reciting are digging. Not yet being able to understand according to what was heard is not having heard, like dry earth; being able to understand is reaching mud." The commentators agree. Someone says that one understanding is far from the Buddha and another is near the Buddha: the first three masters explain that the various teachings are far from the Buddha and the Lotus is near the Buddha; the latter two interpretations discuss farness and nearness solely within the Lotus. Examining the sūtra, there should be two senses: first, adducing other sūtras against the Lotus to explain farness and nearness; second, discussing farness and nearness in terms of the Lotus itself. The various masters missed the sūtra's purport.