法華文句記 2.125

2.125

不同他也。舊以所生無量為無相，經以能生一實為無相。從實生諸諸名無量，無量是相何名無相？故經云：「言無量者從一法生」，故不同舊所生無相。注者直云「含法不貲」，但得所生失於能生；經從能生於所以題目人，師將能為所以釋題，故云「從此實相生無量法」，故今更釋能生，故知能生中道實相，與今經實相不別。「二法」者下更釋所生無量，雖曰所生義兼於能，從多名所。「頓謂」等者，即頓部中具有漸頓，能生所生亦指所生，故云「頓中一切法」也。「漸謂」等者，次舉三味，此三味中亦有能所，例頓可知（云云）。「三道」等者，此中三四亦具能所，圓菩薩及佛以為能生，三菩薩二二乘以為所生，故此三四攝法亦遍。例如漸頓亦具能所，是則凡一實理皆諸教流出，《無量義》中述其意耳。故三乘中二乘含四、菩薩兼三，若作三四義通四教如向所對，若作三四並是所生，則菩薩及佛但在三教。從教判權，《玄》文復以四佛為四果者，則圓佛為一而生權三，能所相對故云四佛。是則菩薩名通於義無失，故於獨一生於兼一，思之可見。「此等」下更結所生以示能生，能生義處《法華》別名，所生無量為《法華》序，故序中一名義兼兩向，然應知從一以出無量，雖舉能出通皆屬序。若無量入一雖涉所生通皆屬正，故義處一法亦成兩向，出生之義處屬序，收會之義處屬正，即從「一義處」已下兩句文，是其兩意。故佛入義處義兼二途。「譬」者，序如下從一出多，正如除從多歸一，故知昔教赴機益物如用錢市物，而皆未知其大數。「從一」下合喻。「如此」等者，結前能所以成兩解，能生不違論，所生不違經，但依兩解經論理存。消釋既爾得意者何？即所生為能生方是異名，能生家之所生此乃成序。若也專能，何殊生等及昔一圓？若專論所，何異注者及昔三教？是故各存還成雙失，所以今家能所相從二義俱立。若專序者，則《法華》已前非但未論會多歸一，亦未曾說從一出多，故《無量義》唯今經序。

It is not the same as the others. The old masters took the produced immeasurability as signless; the sūtra takes the producing single reality as signless. Arising from reality into the various, the various are named immeasurable; immeasurability is a sign, so how could it be called signless? Hence the sūtra says: “What is termed ‘immeasurable’ arises from a single dharma”; thus it is not the same as the old masters' produced signlessness. The commentator merely says “containing dharmas immeasurably”; he grasps only that which is produced and loses that which produces. The sūtra derives the title from that which produces; human masters have taken that which produces as the reason to explain the title, hence saying “from this true character are produced immeasurable dharmas”; therefore, we now further explain that which produces, and thereby know that the producing middle-way true character is not different from the true character of the present sūtra. Regarding “Two dharmas” below, it further explains the produced immeasurability; although termed that which is produced, in meaning it partakes of that which produces, and is named “produced” from the perspective of the majority. Regarding “Sudden refers to,” etc.: within the sudden division, gradual and sudden are both possessed; producing and produced also point to what is produced, hence saying “all dharmas within the sudden.” Regarding “Gradual refers to,” etc.: next, it adduces the three flavors; within these three flavors, producing and produced are also present, which can be known by analogy with the sudden (and so forth). Regarding “Three paths,” etc.: here, the three and four also possess producing and produced: the perfect bodhisattvas and buddhas are taken as that which produces; the three bodhisattvas and the two [vehicles of] two vehicles are taken as that which is produced; thus, these three and four encompass all dharmas completely. By analogy, the gradual and sudden also possess producing and produced; this means that in every case the one real principle flows forth into all teachings, and the Amitārtha expresses this intent. Therefore, within the three vehicles, the two vehicles contain four, and the bodhisattva combines three; if taken as three and four, the meaning applies across the four teachings as correlated just now; if taken as three and four being entirely that which is produced, then the bodhisattva and buddha belong only to the three teachings. Classifying the provisional from the perspective of teaching, the Mysterious Meaning further takes the four buddhas as four fruits: then the perfect buddha is the one that produces the provisional three; producing and produced being contrasted, they are called the four buddhas. Thus, the bodhisattva's name applies to the meaning without error; hence, from the solitary one arises the combined one, which can be seen upon reflection. From “These and such” below, it further summarizes that which is produced to indicate that which produces: the locus of the producing meaning is the alternate name of the Lotus; the produced immeasurability serves as the introduction to the Lotus; therefore, a single name in the introduction partakes of both directions in meaning. However, one should know that from the one emerging as the immeasurable, although bringing out that which can emerge, entirely belongs to the introduction; if the immeasurable enters the one, although involving that which is produced, it entirely belongs to the main body. Thus, the single dharma of the locus of meaning also forms two directions: the locus of meaning of emergence belongs to the introduction; the locus of meaning of gathering and unifying belongs to the main body. The two lines of text from “one locus of meaning” downward are precisely these two intents. Therefore, the Buddha's entering the locus of meaning partakes of two courses in meaning. Regarding the “metaphor”: the introduction is like emerging from one into many below; the main body is like counting down from many to converge into one; thus one knows that previous teachings responded to capacities to benefit beings like using coins to buy goods, yet none knew the grand sum. From “From the one” below is the application of the metaphor. Regarding “Such as this,” etc.: it summarizes the preceding producing and produced to establish the two interpretations: that which produces does not contravene the treatise; that which is produced does not contravene the sūtra; simply relying on both interpretations, the principle of sūtra and treatise is preserved. Since the explanation is such, what is grasping the meaning? Taking that which is produced as that which produces is precisely the alternate name; that which is produced of that which produces precisely constitutes the introduction. If one exclusively emphasizes that which produces, how does it differ from Guan and others or the single perfect teaching of old? If one exclusively discusses that which is produced, how does it differ from the commentator and the three teachings of old? Therefore, preserving each separately results in a double loss; hence, our school combines producing and produced, and both meanings are established. If one takes it exclusively as an introduction, then prior to the Lotus, not only was gathering the many to return to the one not yet discussed, but emerging from the one into the many was also never expounded; therefore, the Amitārtha serves exclusively as the introduction to the present sūtra.