法華文句記 2.61

2.61

「本迹者」為三：先明本迹莫測，次、「所以」下明施迹意，三、「然其」下正示本拂迹。初文中云「或齊法王」者，如文殊本是龍種上尊王佛，餘並準知。「散影垂容」等者，同前聲聞總明本迹。次施迹意中有法、譬、合，譬中云「槌砧」者，化主為槌，輔者為砧，乃至互為皆為成器，本以古質為淳朴，今以未治為淳朴，令其成器，故名為器。淳朴不一故名為諸。觀中名破為成。觀後「云云」者，五住對三次與不次，觀亦如是思之可知。「同謀」下「云云」者，應合喻云，今開祕藏不涉權下，故證信之人皆非率爾，故今文列不必在多。列眾雖爾，本門得道數倍諸經，即先得無生增道者是，故知復是隨要列耳。此明數中已當因緣，雖即不明約教本迹，因緣之人既預密謀，必是圓人及有遠本。「八正即八萬」者，既是無作，道品八正無不觀彼百界千如，十善既為所觀，八正即是能觀，能所相從各有八萬。次明位中，初是因緣，次「應四種」下約教。初文中云「無上道如境妙中」者，六境初四菩提是也。境咸妙道之所趣，以所顯能故須指境。若辨四悉者，三不退異，世界也；入位功德，生善也；必治無明，對治也；證一分真，第一義也。下去準知，不能具記。「具此名跋致」者，阿者無也。跋致者退也。第三祇時橫得三不退故，離五障時三義俱得，即是第三僧祇通至百劫，通是三不退也。至此名為上忍故也。次通教位引六心者，通教地前無位可論，借別位名以通其位，即指別教七信已上入乾慧也，故云初地至六地方名位不退。或指地前假立七賢，即以忍位為第六心，依小乘位雖云忍位名位不退，望菩薩乘猶名為退。次別教中許地論師故不破。圓位者，諸教圓位不過華嚴，餘文雖有位義不彰，或略舉初住闕後諸位，初住既爾行向豈殊？豈得同其地前伏惑？然又華嚴住後兼別，或便一向作次第解，或以一向作圓頓解，一何誤哉！具三不退者，若先以不次寄次第說者，則七信名位不退，八信已去名行不退，初住已去名念不退，今從初住已具三德，名三不退，故云具也。般若是位，離二死故；解脫是行，諸行具故；法身名念，證實境故。彼經第七〈賢首品〉中廣明其相，卷初帝釋問法慧云：初住成就幾法、幾功德藏？法慧答云：此處甚深，難信難知、難說難解、難通難分別。然承佛力具足演說，仍先較量云：供養十方阿僧祇眾生樂具，經於千劫復令證支佛，百千億分不及其一。又云：欲知十方世界一即多、多即一，一念無量念等，望法華中施四百萬億阿僧祇世界六趣四生，乃至令得無學，不如初隨喜人，彼經仍易彼是聖位，故云十方等。望此第五十人一念功德，方顯圓位不可思議，此經為難，既俱是圓初後不二，亦何彼此？「尚非初住」者，此諸菩薩皆是一生補處，尚是古佛，況復初住？自新譯來但以瑜伽唯識之位，掩蔽華嚴圓常之說，誰知唯識等文但明別位？後代誰肯見茲同異？又復有人全毀唯識論之權宗，此則全迷方便之路。「不識迹」者，迹居諸經之首，來至《法華經》初，驗知可是淺位人耶？既失其本、理迷其迹，況從部判？部妙人尊，諸師既不曉於五時，安知菩薩本迹？故云「所歎既謬」等。以藏歎通尚已成失，以偏歎圓過莫大矣。「還成增減兩謗」者，秖此一謬義招二失，經無三教苦欲增之，抑圓成偏減豈過此？三觀即三不退者，空位假行中念一心者，還約妙三一觀悉具。「云云」者，委釋次第不次第相，及以一念須約六即。「極有眉眼」者，縱而奪之，雖有眉眼大體全無。從「覈論」下，奪也。「無趣向」者，此現德等何教無之，雖云法報不簡圓別，儻分圓別為初為後，乃至諸句為橫為豎？故總破云無宗體也。若有宗體故證位人依經立位，位之所依名為位本，本即是體、位即是宗，況復今經特出諸教諸位之上，準教歎德意則可知。故始自不退終于度生，先定體宗方可歎德。

Regarding "Origin and traces," it comprises three parts: first, explaining that origin and traces are unfathomable; next, from "The reason why" down, explaining the intention behind manifesting the traces; third, from "However, their" down, directly indicating the origin and brushing away the traces. In the first part, where it says "or equal to the Dharma King," this refers to Mañjuśrī who was originally the Dragon Species Superior Honored King Buddha, and the rest can be understood similarly by analogy. "Scattering shadows and letting down physical appearances" and so forth summarizes origin and traces as was done previously for the voice-hearers. Next, within the intention behind manifesting the traces, there are the doctrine, the simile, and the application. In the simile, where it says "hammer and anvil," the leader of transformation is the hammer, the assistants are the anvil, and even mutually so, all serving to make a vessel. Originally, ancient simplicity was regarded as pure simplicity, but here unworked raw material is regarded as pure simplicity, causing it to become a vessel, and thus it is called a vessel. Because pure simplicity is manifold, they are called "various." In contemplation, breaking down is called accomplishing. Where it says "and so on" after contemplation: the five dwellings of affliction correspond to the three [contemplations], both gradually and non-gradually; contemplation is also like this, which can be understood upon reflection. Where it says "and so on" under "colluding": it should correspond to the simile, meaning that now the secret treasury is opened, not involving provisional or inferior teachings; therefore those who attest to faith are by no means casual, and so their being listed in the present text does not need to be numerous. Even though the listing of the assembly is like this, the number of those attaining the Path in the origin section is several times greater than in other sūtras, which refers to those who previously attained the non-arising and advanced on the Path; thus we know that it is again a listing according to necessity. In explaining the numbers, this already corresponds to causes and conditions. Although it does not directly explain origin and traces in terms of the teachings, those of causes and conditions, having participated in the secret plan, must be persons of the perfect [teaching] possessing a distant origin. Where it says "the eightfold correct [path] is the eighty thousand": since it is unconditioned, not one among the eightfold correct path of the path-factors fails to contemplate those hundred realms and thousand suchnesses. With the ten goods being the contemplated, the eightfold correct path is the contemplating; the active and passive following one another each number eighty thousand. Next, in explaining the stages, the first is causes and conditions; next, from "should be four kinds" down, it is explained in terms of the teachings. Where the first part says "the unsurpassed path, as in the wondrousness of the object": this is the first four bodhis of the six objects. The objects are all what the wondrous path tends toward; because the object reveals the capacity, one must point to the object. If discerning the four siddhāntas: the three non-retrogressions differ as the worldly siddhānta; entering the stage of merit is the generating of good; necessarily curing ignorance is the counteractive; realizing one portion of truth is the supreme truth. What follows can be understood by analogy and cannot be fully recorded. Where it says "possessing these is called a -bhadra (varti)": a means non-; -bhadra (varti) means retrogression. Because at the third asaṃkhyeya [eon] one horizontally attains the three non-retrogressions, when leaving behind the five hindrances all three meanings are attained; this is the third asaṃkhyeya extending through the hundred eons, pervading all three non-retrogressions. Reaching this point is termed the supreme acceptance. Next, citing the six minds for the stages of the shared teaching: in the shared teaching, prior to the bhūmis there are no stages to speak of, so the names of the separate stages are borrowed to make its stages intelligible, pointing to the seventh faith and above of the separate teaching entering dry wisdom; hence it says that from the first bhūmi to the sixth bhūmi is only then called the non-retrogression of stage. Or it points to the provisionally established seven worthies prior to the bhūmis, taking the stage of acceptance as the sixth mind. Although according to the stages of the small vehicle the stage of acceptance is called the non-retrogression of stage, looking toward the bodhisattva vehicle it is still termed retrogression. Next, in the separate teaching, the Daśabhūmika masters are accepted, so it is not refuted. As for the stages of the perfect teaching: the perfect stages among all teachings do not surpass the Avataṃsaka; although other texts have stages, the meaning is not apparent, or they briefly mention the first dwelling while omitting the subsequent stages. The first dwelling being like this, how could the practices and transferences be different? How could they be the same as subduing delusions prior to the bhūmis? However, in the Avataṃsaka, after the dwellings it also combines the separate, and some unilaterally understand it as gradual, while others unilaterally understand it as perfect and sudden—what a mistake! Regarding possessing the three non-retrogressions: if one first relies on the non-gradual to speak provisionally of the gradual, then the seventh faith is called non-retrogression of stage, the eighth faith and beyond are called non-retrogression of practice, and the first dwelling and beyond are called non-retrogression of mindfulness; now, because from the first dwelling one already possesses the three virtues, they are called the three non-retrogressions, hence it says "possessing." Prajñā is the stage, because it leaves behind the two kinds of death; vimokṣa is the practice, because all practices are complete; dharmakāya is called mindfulness, because it realizes the real object. In chapter seven of that sūtra, the "Worthiest Foremost Chapter," its characteristics are explained at length. At the beginning of the fascicle, Śakra asks Dharma-wisdom: "How many dharmas and how many treasuries of merit does the first dwelling achieve?" Dharma-wisdom replies: "This place is extremely profound, difficult to believe and difficult to know, difficult to explain and difficult to understand, difficult to penetrate and difficult to distinguish. Yet, relying on the Buddha's power, I shall fully expound it." He still first makes a comparison, saying: "Giving requisites of joy to beings of the asaṃkhyeyas of the ten directions for a thousand eons, and further causing them to realize pratyekabuddhahood, does not equal a hundred-thousand-billionth part of it." He also says: "Desiring to know that the ten directions' worlds, one is many and many is one, one thought is measureless thoughts, and so forth." Looking toward the Lotus Sūtra, giving to four million billion asaṃkhyeya worlds of the six destinies and four modes of birth, and even causing them to attain the stage beyond study, is not as good as the person who rejoices upon first hearing; that sūtra is still easy, for that is a noble stage, hence it says "ten directions" and so forth. Looking toward the merit of this fiftieth person in a single thought, only then is the inconceivable nature of the perfect stage revealed; this sūtra is difficult. Since both are the perfect [teaching], the beginning and the end are non-dual, so how could there be a difference between this and that? Where it says "they are not even of the first dwelling": these bodhisattvas are all in the stage of one lifetime away from succession, and are even ancient buddhas, so how could they merely be of the first dwelling? Since the new translations, they have merely used the stages of Yogācāra and Vijñaptimātra to obscure the teachings of the perfect and eternal in the Avataṃsaka; who knows that the texts of Vijñaptimātra and so on only clarify the separate stages? Who in later generations would be willing to perceive these similarities and differences? Furthermore, there are those who totally disparage the provisional school of the Vijñaptimātravāda treatises; this is to be completely blind to the path of skillful means. Regarding "not knowing the traces": their traces occupy the head of the various sūtras, coming down to the beginning of the Lotus Sūtra; from this evidence, could they possibly be persons of shallow stages? Having lost their origin, in principle one is confused about their traces; how much more when judging from the section? The section is wondrous and the persons are venerable; since the masters do not understand the five periods, how could they know the origin and traces of the bodhisattvas? Hence it says: "The praise being already mistaken," and so forth. Praising the shared with the Tripiṭaka already constitutes an error; praising the perfect with the one-sided—no fault is greater than this. Where it says "it turns out to become the two slanders of addition and reduction": this single error brings about two faults. The sūtra has no three teachings, yet they stubbornly wish to add them; to suppress the perfect and make it one-sided—what reduction could surpass this? That the three contemplations are the three non-retrogressions: emptiness is the stage, provisionality is the practice, middle is mindfulness, and in a single mind, this still relies on the wondrous three, where one contemplation possesses all. Where it says "and so on": this elaborates on the characteristics of the gradual and non-gradual, and that a single thought must be related to the six identities. Where it says "it indeed has eyebrows and eyes": this concedes and then takes away; although it has eyebrows and eyes, it entirely lacks the main body. From "examined thoroughly" down, it takes away. Regarding "having no destination": where in any teaching are these manifested virtues and the like absent? Although it speaks of dharmakāya and saṃbhogakāya, it does not distinguish the perfect from the separate; if one divides the perfect and separate into earlier and later, and even whether the various phrases are horizontal or vertical? Therefore it refutes them in general, saying that they lack central theme and essence. If there are central theme and essence, therefore those who attest to the stages establish stages based on the sūtra; that upon which the stages rely is called the root of the stages, the root being the essence and the stage being the central theme. How much more so when the present sūtra exceptionally surpasses the various teachings and various stages; judging by the teachings, the intention behind praising their virtues can be understood. Therefore, from non-retrogression at the beginning to saving sentient beings at the end, one must first determine the essence and central theme before one can praise their virtues.