法華文句記 10.121

10.121

次別救者，具述元破一一救之。一云眾本相違者，準《正法華》及以隋朝崛多三藏《添品法華》中，此品並皆在於經末。救曰：《正》、《妙》二本譯人既異，所見各別，若令盡同此不可也。言《添品》者，準南山《內典錄》云：「崛多擅移〈囑累〉著後」，崛多既其擅改，法護未可為憑，《正》本既其居先，《添品》不名擅改，南山既斥添品，義當二本俱非。何者？羅什生雖龜茲，遍遊五竺，豈獨不見梵本《法華》？久居長安，豈不曾見法護所譯？而再譯不用者，當知法護非堪指南；若堪指南，何不文義咸依《正》本，若嫌後譯文義澆薄，則隋朝所譯彌薄於前，今依什譯理可準憑。故叡公云：「梵音錯者正之以天竺，秦言謬者正之以字義，不可譯者即而書之。」豈什公與四子頓爾無識，輒移一品安置經中？若不測旨歸，應仰之而已，何得以凡見斗尺量度大海虛空耶？

Next, as for the specific rebuttals, I will fully recount their original refutations and rebut each one. First, they say that there is a contradiction among versions: according to the *Saddharmapuṇḍarīka* [translated by Dharmarakṣa] and the Sui dynasty Tripiṭaka Master [Jñāna]gupta's *Lotus Sūtra with Added Chapters*, this chapter is in both cases at the very end of the sūtra. I rebut this: The two versions, the *Saddharmapuṇḍarīka* and the *Wondrous Dharma*, had different translators and their perspectives differed; to demand that they be completely identical is inadmissible. Regarding the *Added Chapters*, according to Nánshān's *Dàtáng nèidiǎn lù*: "[Jñāna]gupta arbitrarily moved the 'Entrustment' and placed it at the end." Since Gupta arbitrarily altered it, Dharmarakṣa cannot be relied upon [as precedent either]. If the *Saddharmapuṇḍarīka* version came first and therefore the *Added Chapters* is not called an arbitrary alteration, then since Nánshān denounced the *Added Chapters*, logically both versions must be mistaken. Why so? Although Kumārajīva was born in Kucha, he traveled throughout the five regions of India; how could he alone not have seen the Sanskrit text of the *Lotus Sūtra*? He resided long in Chang'an; how could he never have seen Dharmarakṣa's translation? Yet in retranslating it he did not follow it, so you should know that Dharmarakṣa cannot serve as a reliable guide. If he could serve as a guide, why did he not follow the *Saddharmapuṇḍarīka* in both text and meaning? If you dislike the later translation for being shallow in text and meaning, then the Sui translation is even shallower than the earlier one; now relying on Kumārajīva's translation is logically dependable. Thus Master Ruì said: "Where the Sanskrit pronunciation was erroneous, he corrected it according to India; where the Qin phrasing was mistaken, he corrected it according to the meaning of the characters; and what could not be translated, he transcribed as it was." How could Kumārajīva and his four disciples suddenly be so ignorant as to arbitrarily move an entire chapter and position it in the middle of the sūtra? If you cannot fathom its purpose, you should simply revere it; how can you use the peck and foot-rule of ordinary views to measure the vast ocean and empty space?