法華文句記 2.67

2.67

問答者，初問中初句立宗，「三藏」下縱許，「聲聞」下立例，「迹為」下立難。立宗意者，斷惑也。地住已上皆約圓教斷位歎德，三藏菩薩始終不斷，容不彼歎。於斷惑中尚歎二乘，迹為通別斷惑菩薩何得不歎，而橫豎二歎悉唯歎圓。答意者，義通本迹、意唯在圓，豎文似歎於別，依部唯歎於圓，借迹消文經意從本，故準歎聲聞從迹，亦應菩薩四教俱歎，但欲知圓旨故亡迹以存本及去初而取後。次問可見。答中為三：初、正答。次、「舊云」下引別位為例，八地位既未極，舊釋尚具德不疑，何妨圓人諸位位位具足諸德。三、《法華論》去引證。《論》云：「彼菩薩德，十三句、二文攝取，應知一者上支下支門，二者攝取事門。」初上支下支謂總相別相，應知初至不退轉是總，餘者是別。彼《論》云：「不退有十種示現」，具如今引，但除初總句猶有十二句，乃以供養、植德二句合為第四示現，名稱、度生二句合為第十示現，故但成十示現，皆以不退為名。故知圓釋句句互通，一一示現具十示現、具一切諸句，何但十示現十二句耶？此與四十二字門意同。又經云以慈修身句中，論文具修身心二業，經文所以略修心者，慈即是心，心熏於身故不別說；乃至依我空法空不退，故知地住俱證二空。所以豎釋文雖別對意非別者，一者以有次文橫釋是約豎論橫，二者依《論》句句義意以對諸地，如初地云不墮二邊三觀具足，自利利他有無雙照。若福若智不離一心，內因外緣何嘗不具？初地既爾後去悉然，即此地中橫竪具足，為對次第權借地名，為顯唯圓彼須橫釋。故《論》中攝取事門即當豎釋，是故今文具用《論》中二門解釋，但今文中準《論》，於何等境界下剩「何等」二字。《論》但云：「何等境界中應作所作故」。《論》自釋云：「地清淨者，八地已上三地無相行寂靜清淨」，今文意以彼《論》三何等言，一一皆屬諸地，清淨即諸地惑斷，方便即諸地進趣，境界即諸地所依，應作等即諸地功用。《論》云：「方便者，有四種：一者攝取妙法方便，任持妙法以樂說力為人說故」，即初四句隨義思之。

Regarding the questions and answers: in the first question, the opening sentence establishes the proposition, from "Tripiṭaka" onward concedes [the point], from "śrāvakas" onward sets up an example, and from "manifested traces" onward presents the objection. The intention of establishing the proposition concerns severing afflictions: from the stages (bhūmi) and abodes (vihāra) upward, the virtues are praised according to the stage of severing [afflictions] in the perfect teaching; since bodhisattvas of the Tripiṭaka never sever them from beginning to end, they might well not be praised in that way. Even the two vehicles are praised with respect to severing afflictions; how could the bodhisattvas of the shared and distinct teachings who sever afflictions in their manifested traces not be praised, while both horizontal and vertical praises are exclusively praises of the perfect? The intention of the answer is that while the meaning applies to both origin and traces, the intent lies solely in the perfect; though the vertical text seems to praise the distinct, according to the departmental division it exclusively praises the perfect; borrowing traces to explain the text, the intent of the sūtra follows the origin. Therefore, just as praising the śrāvakas follows the traces, the bodhisattvas should also be praised across all four teachings, yet wishing to make known the perfect purport, traces are set aside to preserve the origin, and the initial is eliminated to take the final. The next question is obvious. The answer has three parts: first, the direct answer. Second, from "the ancient [masters] said" onward, cites the stages of the distinct teaching as an example: since the eighth stage is not yet the ultimate, and the ancient commentaries still held without doubt that it was endowed with virtues, what obstacle is there to a person of the perfect [teaching] being fully endowed with all virtues in stage after stage? Third, from "the Treatise on the Lotus Sūtra" onward, cites testimony. The Treatise says: 'Those virtues of the bodhisattva are subsumed by thirteen phrases and two passages; one should know that the first is the gate of upper branches and lower branches, and the second is the gate of activities that subsume.' First, 'upper branches and lower branches' refers to general characteristics and specific characteristics; one should know that from the beginning up to 'irreversible' is general, while the remainder are specific. That Treatise says: 'Irreversibility has ten manifestations,' as fully cited now; yet setting aside the first general phrase, there remain twelve phrases. The two phrases of 'making offerings' and 'planting virtues' are combined into the fourth manifestation, and the two phrases of 'renown' and 'saving sentient beings' are combined into the tenth manifestation; thus only ten manifestations are formed, all named with respect to irreversibility. Therefore one knows that in the perfect explanation, every phrase mutually communicates; each manifestation contains the ten manifestations and contains all phrases—how could it be only ten manifestations and twelve phrases? This shares the same intent as the gate of forty-two syllables. Furthermore, in the phrase where the sūtra speaks of 'cultivating the body with benevolence,' the text of the Treatise speaks fully of cultivating both bodily and mental karmas; the reason the sūtra text abbreviates the cultivation of the mind is that benevolence is the mind itself, and since the mind perfumes the body, it is not mentioned separately; down to irreversibility based on the emptiness of self and emptiness of dharmas, whereby one knows that the stages and abodes both witness the two kinds of emptiness. Therefore, although the vertical explanation is correlated specifically in text, its intent is not distinct: first, because the subsequent horizontal explanation discusses the horizontal in terms of the vertical; second, by relying on the Treatise's phrasing and intent to correspond to the various stages, as when the first stage is said not to fall into the two extremes and to be endowed with the three contemplations, illuminating both self-benefit and benefiting others, existence and non-existence alike. Whether fortune or wisdom, they are not separate from the single mind; how could internal causes and external conditions fail to be complete? Since the first stage is thus, all following [stages] are also like this; right within this stage, both horizontal and vertical are complete. In order to respond to gradual sequence, the names of the stages are provisionally borrowed, and in order to reveal what is solely perfect, that requires a horizontal explanation. Therefore, the gate of subsuming activities in the Treatise corresponds to the vertical explanation; hence the present text employs both gates from the Treatise in its explanation. However, in the present text, following the Treatise, under 'what kind of realm,' the two characters 'what kind' are redundant. The Treatise merely says: 'because within what kind of realm they should perform what is to be performed.' The Treatise itself explains: 'Stage purity means that in the three stages from the eighth stage upward, the signless practice is quiet and pure.' The present text's intent is that those three uses of 'what kind' in the Treatise each pertain to the various stages: purity is the severing of afflictions in the various stages, skillful means is the progression through the various stages, realm is that upon which the various stages rely, and 'should perform,' etc., are the functions of the various stages. The Treatise says: 'Skillful means are of four kinds: first, the skillful means of subsuming the wondrous dharma, because one upholds the wondrous dharma and expounds it for others through the power of delight in speech'—this refers to the first four phrases, to be considered according to their meaning.