法華文句記 1.48

1.48

「三引證」者，初證感應；「又云」下，證教相；「壽量」下，證本迹；「譬喻」下，證觀心。初文先引，「若人天」下，釋。初言因緣者，即感應之別名，名異義同故得為證，但因緣名通不局能所，故《止觀》第一云：「或因於聖、緣於凡，或因於凡、緣於聖，縱無強弱亦可互為。何者？從機則機親而應疎，從應則應親而機疎，故使更互受名不同。」但感應之名不可互立，大事因緣雖在迹門，據理應須雙指本迹，但佛出世正為顯實，故且從迹。又復讓下本迹故也。釋中先舉非；次「實相」下，顯是。初舉非中所以不簡三教菩薩，唯斥人天小乘者，具如《玄》文。從難從要，下去例然。言「不成機感」者，非今經之廣博實相因緣故也。次顯是中，既以實相一大對簡小理，其義即足，故不暇開等兼等簡之，既得云大亦應云深。言「佛指此為事」者，理不名事，但佛欲以此理化人，故名為事，能化所化故云因緣。

Regarding "three, citing corroborations": first, corroborating stimulus and response; following "It also says...", corroborating the teaching's characteristics; following "Life Span...", corroborating origin and traces; following "Simile...", corroborating contemplation of the mind. The first passage first cites [the text], and following "If humans and devas...", it explains. First, as for the words "causes and conditions": this is another name for stimulus and response; differing in name but identical in meaning, it can serve as corroboration. However, the name "causes and conditions" is general and not restricted to agent and object. Therefore, the first fascicle of *Great Cessation and Contemplation* says: "Either it is caused by the sage and conditioned by the ordinary person, or caused by the ordinary person and conditioned by the sage; even without stronger and weaker, they may alternate with each other. Why? In terms of capacity, capacity is intimate and response is distant; in terms of response, response is intimate and capacity is distant. Thus they alternately receive different names." But the names "stimulus" and "response" cannot be established interchangeably. Although the one great cause and condition belongs to the trace gate, in terms of principle it should properly point to both origin and traces; but the Buddha's appearance in the world is precisely to reveal the real, and therefore it follows the traces for now. Furthermore, it yields to the origin and traces below. In the explanation, it first raises what is not [the case]; next, following "true character...", it reveals what is correct. In the initial raising of what is not [the case], the reason it does not screen out the bodhisattvas of the three teachings, but only rejects humans, devas, and the Small Vehicle, is fully as in the text of the *Profound Meaning*. Proceeding from the difficult and the essential, the rest below follow this pattern. As for "it does not constitute capacity and stimulus": this is because it is not the extensive causes and conditions of the true character of this sūtra. Next, in revealing what is correct: since using the one great [cause and condition] of the true character to contrast with and screen out the small principle already makes the meaning sufficient, there was no time to screen them out by combining opening and the like; since it can be called great, it should also be called deep. As for "the Buddha refers to this as the matter": principle is not called a matter, but because the Buddha wishes to transform people through this principle, it is called a matter; agent of transformation and object of transformation are hence called causes and conditions.