妙法蓮華經文句 9.42

9.42

先出異解。叡師〈序〉云「壽無量劫未足以明其久，分身無數不足以異其體，然則壽量定其非數，分身明其不異，普賢顯其無成，多寶明其不滅耳。」河西道朗云：「明法身真化不異、存沒理一，多寶現明法身常存，壽量明與太虛齊量。」道場觀云：「會三歸一，乘之始也；滅影澄神，乘之終也。滅影謂息迹，澄神則明本，故迹無常而本常也。」注者云「非存亡之數曰壽，出修夭之限稱量，法身非形年所攝，使大士修踐極之照，不以伽耶為成佛、百年為期頤也。」竺道生云：「其色身佛者，應現而有，無有實形，既形不實豈有壽哉？然則萬形同致、古今為一，古亦今也今亦古也，無時不有、無處不在，若有時不有、有處不在者，於眾生然耳，佛不爾也，是以極譚長壽，云伽耶是也。伽耶是者非復伽耶，伽耶既非，彼長何獨是乎？長短斯亡，長短恒存焉。」前代匠者如向所說，多約無量明常，近世人師多云壽是量法，前過恒沙、後倍上數，終歸限極而明無常。又惑者執品明壽量，量是無常那作常解？今為答之，品直道壽量，不道壽有量、不道壽無量，爾作無常、他作常解，此復何咎？鷸蚌相扼，我乘其弊，應具四解：謂實有量而言無量，《彌陀》是也；實無量而言量，如此品及《金光明》是也，實無量而言無量，如《涅槃》云「唯佛與佛其壽無量」是也；實有量而言量，如八十唱滅是也。品文具有此義，豈可是一而非三耶？

First, presenting the different interpretations. Master Sengrui's Preface states: 'A lifespan of immeasurable kalpas is not yet enough to clarify its antiquity, and emanated bodies without number are not enough to differentiate its essence. Thus, "lifespan measure" determines that it is beyond numbers, emanated bodies clarify that they are not different, Samantabhadra reveals that it has no attainment, and Prabhūtaratna clarifies that it has no extinction.' Daolang of Hexi says: 'It clarifies that the dharmakāya's true and manifested [states] are not different, and that remaining and disappearing share one principle: Prabhūtaratna's appearance clarifies that the dharmakāya is eternally enduring, while the "Lifespan" clarifies that it is coextensive with the great void.' Daochang Guan says: 'Converging the three into the one is the beginning of the vehicle; quenching the shadow and clarifying the spirit is the culmination of the vehicle. Quenching the shadow refers to ceasing the traces, and clarifying the spirit clarifies the origin; hence the traces are impermanent while the origin is permanent.' The annotator says: 'That which is not of the count of remaining or perishing is called "life"; that which transcends the limits of longevity or brevity is called "measure." The dharmakāya is not contained within form or age; it causes great beings to cultivate the illumination that treads to the utmost, not taking Gayā as the attainment of Buddhahood nor a hundred years as the zenith of life.' Zhu Daosheng says: 'As for the Buddha of the physical form body, it exists through responsive manifestation and has no real form. Since the form is not real, how could it have a lifespan? Thus, the myriad forms arrive at the same end, and past and present are one; the past is the present and the present is the past; there is no time when it is not present, and no place where it does not exist. If at some time it were not present or in some place it did not exist, that would only be true for sentient beings, but not so for the Buddha. Therefore, in speaking maximally of a long lifespan, it says that Gayā is it. If Gayā is it, it is no longer Gayā; and since Gayā is not [real], why should that length alone be so? Length and brevity both perish, and length and brevity forever endure.' As stated above, the masters of previous generations mostly clarified permanence in terms of immeasurability. Recent teachers mostly say that life is a measured phenomenon: traversing the sands of the Ganges in the past, and doubling that number in the future, it ultimately returns to limits and extremities to clarify impermanence. Moreover, confused persons grasp at the chapter's title clarifying "lifespan measure": if measure is impermanence, how can it be interpreted as permanence? Now, in response: the chapter directly says "lifespan measure"; it does not say that life has a measure, nor does it say that life is measureless. You interpret it as impermanence, while others interpret it as permanence—what fault is there in this? When the snipe and the clam seize each other, I take advantage of their plight: one should provide four interpretations. Namely: [1] actually having a measure yet spoken of as measureless, such as Amitābha; [2] actually being measureless yet spoken of as measured, such as this chapter and the Suvarṇaprabhāsa; [3] actually being measureless and spoken of as measureless, as the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says, 'Only between Buddha and Buddha is their lifespan measureless'; [4] actually having a measure and spoken of as measured, as in proclaiming extinction at eighty [years of age]. The text of this chapter possesses all these meanings; how could one be correct and the [other] three wrong?