法華文句記 10.136

10.136

第十眾無命坐，難云：佛處高遠眾人請接，今既還處地亦應命下勅令復坐，何容久立不賜安居，故知〈囑累〉定居經後。翻曰：凡假他力必須請加，若任自力不求他援，處空非己力所及，故請佛神通；還本任自力所能，故不待佛命。況本緣佛入塔故請在空，今佛從座起豈可安坐？故云益加恭敬曲躬低頭。佛既復座說法，時眾理應復座，無文之論義準應知。又眾若不起不坐，應仍在空，何故〈普門品〉中無盡意云「從座而起」，〈陀羅尼品〉初藥王從座而起，故知不可見略却就座，等文移品向後。又品題有囑累之說，令向後者，品內有囑累之義，亦應皆移。然囑累品題雖云囑累，品內但通云「我於無量阿僧祇，修習難得阿耨三菩提法，付囑汝等」，故神力品題雖云神力，品內云「為囑累是經故，乃以如來四法囑累上行」等也。故應先移〈囑累〉次移〈神力〉著〈囑累〉後。又〈囑累品〉初云「現大神力」，〈神力品〉內有囑累之言，是故二品俱移向後。若俱移向後，不可兩品重張，不可兩品前後，若有前後，還失最後。若言經文次第，不輕已後即合勸持，何事以神力而間雜之？寶塔慕覓宣弘之人，秖應次以〈持品〉續之，何得許以〈調達品〉間？若其品次不依羅什，理須一切並依《正經》，今經聲聞一萬二千，《正經》但有一千二百，歎聲聞德乃有一十一句，歎菩薩德則有二十八句，與《妙經》及《論》復不相關，何不咎《論》違《正法華》，而嫌《妙經》違《論》。又《正經》列名之中云「光世音」，「光」「觀」聲同，便即書之。後代何不依「光」釋義？寶掌菩薩離開為二，更加寶印首也。掌已是手，復加頭首離為二人；自在天子以大梵冠首，亦云「三萬天子俱」，即是迴梵文大梵字不盡。別序中不云說大乘經名無量義，直云說斯經已升座三昧，又闕無量義處三昧，不知爾前為說何經？為入何定？何不責《妙經》增加無量義耶？又放光但云「上至三十三天」，法護何事抑佛光明？《妙經》云「八百弟子」，《正經》云「十八人中」，凡云「如恒河沙」，一切皆云「如江河砂」。〈序品〉既爾，正宗之中錯不可數，何不依之而獨引〈囑累〉？是故《正經》並未可依。縱是什公所移，應見梵文深旨；若也漫移，何不安餘品後，而必著此中？使無如上諸妨，更移著後生諸妨耶？故使流行之處眾聖冥加。

Tenth, [concerning the objection that] the assembly was not commanded to sit down: The objection argues, 'The Buddha was situated high and far away, and the great assembly requested to be drawn up [into the air]. Now that [the Buddha] had returned to the ground, he ought also to have commanded them to descend and ordered them to resume their seats. How could he have permitted them to stand for so long without granting them comfortable sitting? Therefore we know that the "Entrustment" [chapter] definitely belongs at the end of the sūtra.' In refutation we say: In all matters relying on another's power, one must request assistance; if relying on one's own power, one does not seek another's aid. Being situated in the air was beyond their own power, and so they requested the Buddha's supernatural powers; returning to their original place was within their own capacity, so they did not await the Buddha's command. Moreover, originally, because the Buddha entered the tower, they requested to be in the air; now that the Buddha had arisen from his seat, how could they remain comfortably seated? Thus [the text] says, 'with redoubled reverence, bowed their bodies and lowered their heads.' Since the Buddha resumed his seat to preach the Dharma, the assembly of that time rationally ought also to have resumed their seats; where the text is silent, one should know this by inference based on principle. Furthermore, if the assembly neither rose nor sat, they should still have been in the air. Why then, in the 'Universal Gate Chapter', does Akṣayamati 'rise from his seat', and at the beginning of the 'Dhāraṇī Chapter' does Bhaiṣajyarāja rise from his seat? Thus we know that one must not, merely because [the text] omits their returning to their seats and so forth, relocate the chapter to the end. Moreover, the chapter title contains the word 'entrustment' (zhǔlěi); if on that account it must be moved to the end, then the meaning of entrustment is also present inside [other] chapters, so should they all be moved as well? However, although the title of the 'Entrustment Chapter' says 'entrustment', inside the chapter it merely says generally: 'Through immeasurable asaṃkhyeya [kalpas] I have practiced the hard-to-attain dharma of anuttarasamyaksaṃbodhi, and now entrust it to you.' Hence, although the title of the 'Supernatural Powers Chapter' says 'supernatural powers', inside the chapter it says, 'In order to entrust this sūtra... [the Tathāgata] entrusted it to Viśiṣṭacāritra and the others through the four dharmas of the Tathāgata.' Therefore one should first move 'Entrustment' and then move 'Supernatural Powers' to place it after 'Entrustment'! Furthermore, the beginning of the 'Entrustment Chapter' says 'manifested great supernatural powers', and the words 'entrustment' are found inside the 'Supernatural Powers Chapter'; on that account, both chapters should be moved to the end! If both were moved to the end, one could not present the two chapters repeatedly, nor could one arrange the two chapters in sequence—for if there were a sequence, one would still lose the ultimate conclusion! If one speaks of the order of the sūtra text, after Sadāparibhūta it should immediately urge upholding [the sūtra]; why interpose 'Supernatural Powers' in between? When the Precious Tower searched for someone to propagate [the Dharma], it should simply have been followed directly by the 'Upholding [the Dharma] Chapter'; how could it allow the 'Devadatta Chapter' to intervene? If the sequence of chapters is not to rely on Kumārajīva, then by principle one must rely entirely on the *Zheng fahua jing* (Dharmarakṣa's translation). Yet the present sūtra has twelve thousand śrāvakas, whereas the *Zheng jing* has only one thousand two hundred; in praising the virtues of the śrāvakas, [the *Zheng jing*] has eleven phrases, and in praising the virtues of the bodhisattvas it has twenty-eight phrases, which again do not accord with the *Wonderful Dharma [Sūtra]* or the *Treatise* (*Upadeśa*). Why not fault the *Treatise* for contradicting the *Zheng fahua*, instead of criticizing the *Wonderful Dharma [Sūtra]* for contradicting the *Treatise*? Moreover, in the listing of names in the *Zheng jing*, it says 'Guangshiyin' (Sound-Illuminator of the World); because the sounds of 'Guang' and 'Guan' were identical, it was simply written down as such. Why have later generations not explained its meaning based on 'Guang'? Ratnahasta Bodhisattva was split into two, with the addition of 'Bao Yinshou' (Ratnamudrāśīrṣa). 'Hasta' is already the hand (palm); adding 'head' (śīrṣa) divided him into two persons! Īśvaradeva is crowned with Mahābrahmā at the head, and it also says 'together with thirty thousand devaputras', which failed to fully translate the Sanskrit word *Mahābrahmā*. In the specific preface, it does not state the preaching of the Mahāyāna sūtra named *Immeasurable Meanings*; it merely says that after preaching this sūtra, he ascended the seat and entered samādhi, and it also lacks the samādhi of the abode of immeasurable meanings—so one does not know what sūtra he preached beforehand, or what samādhi he entered! Why not criticize the *Wonderful Dharma [Sūtra]* for adding the *Immeasurable Meanings*? Furthermore, regarding the emission of light, it merely says 'up to the Trāyastriṃśa Heaven'; why did Dharmarakṣa restrain the Buddha's radiance? The *Wonderful Dharma [Sūtra]* says 'eight hundred disciples', whereas the *Zheng jing* says 'among eighteen persons'; wherever [our text] says 'like the sands of the Ganges', [the other] uniformly says 'like the sand of the river'. The 'Introductory Chapter' being already like this, errors in the main body are beyond counting; why not follow [the *Zheng jing* across the board], instead of selectively citing it on 'Entrustment'? Therefore, the *Zheng jing* cannot be relied upon at all. Even if [this chapter was] relocated by Master Kumārajīva, he must have seen the profound intent of the Sanskrit text; if it were a haphazard relocation, why did he not place it after other chapters, but insisted on placing it right here? Was it to avert the various difficulties mentioned above, only to create all these other difficulties by relocating it behind? Thus, wherever it is circulated, the multitude of sages grant their unseen assistance.