法華文句記 1.161

1.161

釋比丘，引肇公者，在《淨名疏》，什及四子並在偽秦，故曰秦言。肇有四義：一、淨命乞士，二、破煩惱，三、能持戒，四、怖魔。什公分之，一始三終。具二魔怖者，終中前二為怖魔因。引論者闕能持戒，破惡秖是破煩惱耳，故但三義而次第不同。及通初心令魔怖等，故破惡之言且在身口非不斷惑。既並在初，令什義壞，豈以持戒破惑必在於終？又復肇公但翻其名而云名含，不云初後，今之學者安令魔怖耶？「五繫」者，具如《止觀》第五記。「一田」等者，田即農也。應云在家四種如法，更加工也。「涅槃寶梁」下，明經義略，雖復不具三義四義，破惡為本。今明此三義應通初後者，義當約教兼斥肇什，今非但以《論》文通後，復通諸教，況《論》但成因緣一釋。若於此中立四悉者，怖魔即世界，乞士即為人，破惡即對治，出界即第一義。「依經家」等者，義必通初、證信必後，向釋乞士中以「求」釋「乞」，乃以離邪歷境求定等為三藏教者，未能於境即理故也。故至通教方云求真破障理等也。別教言八魔十魔者，破惡既深釋魔須遠，具如《止觀》第八記。圓教中非不破八破十，但以實相為正、破惡屬旁，怖魔亦然。本迹中此諸比丘深淺莫測，故未可定判其位。「迹示五味」者，若不約五味，非今經比丘。「桎梏」者，上質音，足械也。下古沃反，手械也。二諦如桎梏，大慧如解縛，運念為無住，望境為無著，故不著境智出二死家，乞士怖魔準釋可見。「云云」者，中觀既然，空、假及以次不次等對教可見。

Explaining bhikṣu, citing Master Sengzhao, it is in the Commentary on the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa. Kumārajīva and his four disciples were all under the illegitimate Qin; hence it is called "the Qin language." Sengzhao has four meanings: first, a mendicant of pure livelihood; second, destroyer of afflictions; third, one capable of upholding the precepts; fourth, frightener of māras. Master Kumārajīva divided them: one at the beginning and three at the end. Regarding possessing the two terrors of māra, the former two in the end are the causes for terrifying māra. Citing the Treatise, it lacks "capable of upholding the precepts"; "destroying evil" is merely destroying afflictions; thus there are only three meanings, and their order is different. Furthermore, it applies to the initial aspiration causing māra to be terrified, etc.; therefore, the words "destroying evil" tentatively reside in body and mouth, not that it does not sever delusions. Since they are all present at the beginning, Kumārajīva's meaning is undermined: how could upholding precepts and destroying delusions necessarily be at the end? Furthermore, Master Sengzhao merely translated its name, saying the name contains [these meanings], without speaking of beginning and end; how could today's practitioners cause māras to be terrified? Regarding "five bindings," it is fully detailed in the notes on the fifth fascicle of the Great Calming and Contemplation. Regarding "one: fields" and so forth, fields means agriculture. One should say that the four kinds of lawful [livelihood] of the householder also add manual labor. From "the Nirvāṇa and the Ratnarāśi" onward, clarifying that the sūtras' meaning is succinct, although they do not fully present the three or four meanings, destroying evil is the root. Now clarifying that these three meanings should apply to both beginning and end: the meaning should follow the teachings while also refuting Sengzhao and Kumārajīva. Now we not only apply the text of the Treatise to what follows, but also to the various teachings; how much more so given that the Treatise merely establishes the single explanation of causes and conditions? If one establishes the four siddhāntas here: terrifying māra is the mundane; mendicant is individual treatment; destroying evil is diagnosis; transcending the realms is the supreme truth. Regarding "relying on the scriptural compiler" and so forth: the meaning must apply to the beginning, but witnessing faith must come later. In the previous explanation of mendicant, explaining "begging" by "seeking," seeking concentration and so forth by leaving evil and traversing realms was taken as the Tripiṭaka teaching, because it cannot yet view the realm as identical to the principle. Therefore, only upon reaching the Shared Teaching does it speak of seeking the real and destroying the principle of hindrances, and so forth. Regarding the Distinct Teaching speaking of eight māras or ten māras: since destroying evil is deep, the explanation of māra must be far-reaching, as fully detailed in the notes on the eighth fascicle of the Great Calming and Contemplation. In the Perfect Teaching, it is not that it does not destroy eight or ten, but it takes the true character as primary and destroying evil as secondary; terrifying māra is also like this. In the origin and traces, these bhikṣus cannot be fathomed in depth or shallowness, so their stages cannot be definitively determined. As for "traces manifesting the five flavors," if not viewed through the five flavors, they are not the bhikṣus of the present sūtra. As for "fetters and manacles" (zhìgù): the upper character is pronounced zhì, foot shackles; the lower character has the fanqie pronunciation gǔ (gǔ-wò), hand shackles. The two truths are like fetters and manacles; great wisdom is like unbinding them; moving one's thoughts constitutes non-abiding, and facing spheres constitutes non-attachment. Therefore, not being attached to sphere and wisdom, one escapes the house of the two kinds of death; mendicant and terrifying māra can be seen by applying this explanation. As for "and so forth," the middle contemplation being so, emptiness, conventionality, gradual, non-gradual, and so forth can be seen by matching them with the teachings.