法華文句記 1.150

1.150

「直明兩意」下，欲明開顯，先更辨異。所言異者，且置七同，更於藏通七中辨異，則三異四同。何者？時處等四不可不同，如所會、所依、所稟、所證；若心等三，安能不別？別修、別見、別行故也。此仍一往，亦可戒法從別各各得故，解脫從人各各證故，是則五別二同。又若從人亦可俱別，今釋共義不合論之。義分三四乃成旁耳，是故且從七同以說，別教同異準說可知。次「若至」下正明開顯。「法華論」者，明被開者有權有實，未開具四、開已唯一，今加佛道據新入者。《論》中四者，決定、增上、退大、應化。《論》自釋云：「後二與記，前兩不記，根鈍未熟故」。且約此會，即經中云「生滅度想」，決定性也。若彼得聞、《論》中未說，天親豈可迷經文耶？經云：「而於彼土得聞是經」，《論》且一往據現說耳。是故今師但除上慢，即五千起去者是。雖從座去仍判於涅槃中。若四依邊得聞，故上慢者亦非不聞，已聞略開及在後故，但不可云此會得記，種、熟、脫三始終無廢，故準今文，遠近相望四種俱得。今云「住果」，兼於決定及退菩提，住果變異故分二教，是故二種總立住果。又「佛道」者，準經義立。若爾。佛道應化各有別圓。

Below [the phrase] "directly clarifying the two meanings," intending to clarify the opening and revealing, he first further distinguishes their differences. As for the differences spoken of, setting aside for now the seven commonalities, he further distinguishes differences among the seven in the Tripiṭaka and Shared [teachings]: there are three differences and four commonalities. Why is this? The four, such as time and place, cannot but be the same, as in what they gather for, what they rely on, what they receive, and what they realize; but how could the three, such as the mind, not be distinct? It is because they have distinct cultivations, distinct views, and distinct practices. This is still a preliminary perspective; it may also be that the precepts are obtained individually according to distinct [capacities], and vimokṣa is realized individually according to persons; thus there are five differences and two commonalities. Furthermore, if viewed according to persons, they could all be distinct, but this should not be discussed when explaining the meaning of "commonality" now. Dividing the meaning into three and four merely becomes secondary; therefore, he speaks for now in terms of the seven commonalities. The commonalities and differences of the Distinct Teaching can be known by applying this model. Next, from "if arriving at" onward, he directly clarifies the opening and revealing. As for the Treatise on the Lotus Sūtra (*Saddharmapuṇḍarīkopadeśa*), it clarifies that among those who are opened, there are the provisional and the real: before being opened, all four are present; after being opened, there is only one. Now "the buddha-path" is added based on new entrants. The four in the Treatise are the determinate, the overproud, those who regress from the Mahāyāna, and those of transformation and response. The Treatise itself explains: "The latter two are given predictions, while the former two are not given predictions, because their faculties are dull and not yet mature." For now, in terms of this assembly, what the sūtra calls "giving rise to the thought of extinction" refers to the determinate nature. If they hear it there [in other lands] and the Treatise does not speak of it, how could Vasubandhu be confused about the sūtra text? The sūtra says, "Yet in that land they will hear this sūtra"; the Treatise merely takes a preliminary view based on the present [assembly]. Therefore, our master now excludes only the overproud, namely the five thousand who rose and departed. Although they departed from their seats, they are still judged [to attain liberation] within Nirvāṇa. If viewed from the side of the four reliances, they are able to hear it; hence even the overproud are not without hearing it, since they have already heard the brief opening and will hear it later; it is only that they cannot be said to attain predictions in this assembly. The three—planting, maturing, and liberating—are never abandoned from beginning to end; thus according to the present text, viewed from afar and near, all four types attain it. Now, saying "abiding in the fruit" encompasses both the determinate and those who regress from bodhi; because abiding in the fruit and inconceivable transformation are distinguished by two teachings, these two types are collectively established as "abiding in the fruit." Furthermore, "the buddha-path" is established according to the sūtra's meaning. If so, both the buddha-path and transformation and response each possess the Distinct and Perfect [teachings].